Will PD Even Bother Making Another Game?

[Dave A]

There are many dozens of GT6 Premium models that have not been seen in GTS/GT7. Those we have seen have undergone substantial updates.

What are the chances of seeing the GT6 premium's in GT7?

A number of GT5P/GTHD era models had to be heavily redone due to how early they were; case in point, the R32 GT-R's interior: Later models (from GT5 Spec II/DLC era to GT6 era models, mainly the tessellated cars) seem to be more next-gen ready though, case in point being the Z8:

www.gtplanet.net

PD have been striving for future proofed 3D models since the HD era, when it became clear it was unsustainable to rebuild an entire car list, for each new console generation. Car & track 3D models for GTS are the ones than can be brought forward into PS5/PS6. I'd go as far to say I can't see any need to touch the car models moving forward. Tracks are slightly different, the base 3D model, including grandstands, are fine. But they can still bump up texture quality, add denser, more detailed crowds, trackside vehicles & objects.

So where is your evidence that "After GT6 most content, be it cars or tracks, where binned or comprehensively upgraded"?

I see no evidence of that in what you've posted, nor does the absence of some of GT6's premium cars mean what you are implying it must mean.

Do you understand how addpative tessalation and how car modelling works?

 

[Nathan88]

So where is your evidence that "After GT6 most content, be it cars or tracks, where binned or comprehensively upgraded"?

I see no evidence of that in what you've posted, nor does the absence of some of GT6's premium cars mean what you are implying it must mean.

Do you understand how addpative tessalation and how car modelling works?

The evidence is in the fact the GTS car & track list was gutted from GT6. With many old favourites (available as Premiums) missing, and all new cars filling out the list.

You are putting a helluva lot of stock in adaptive tessellation. With an assumption PD had 3D models, that are still class leading to this day, a decade ago. I think it's pretty clear PD made the decision for PS4 & GTS to take the hit and rebuild much from scratch. In the early 2010's I don't believe PD or any dev team even comprehended the quality of 3D models we'd have today. Heck most teams, be it console or PC, are still building new models that are comparable with PD's output on PS3.

PD have always had a good handle on car proportions dating back to the PS1/2 days. In the early 2010's HD era they produced good looking models. But we're on a different level these days, with the finer details, interiors, and so on.

 

[Dave A]

The evidence is in the fact the GTS car & track list was gutted from GT6. With many old favourites (available as Premiums) missing, and all new cars filling out the list.

That doesn't prove anything, although I will give you the tracks from the PS3 era appear to have been mostly redone, the cars however...

You are putting a helluva lot of stock in adaptive tessellation. With an assumption PD had 3D models, that are still class leading to this day, a decade ago.

I've mentioned it once, but I know what it is and what it does.

With an assumption PD had 3D models, that are still class leading to this day, a decade ago.

10 years ago they had car models that far surpass what the PS5 can render in a 20 car race.

I think it's pretty clear PD made the decision for PS4 & GTS to take the hit and rebuild much from scratch.

Is it? Or are you making gross assumptions without any actual evidence, beucase you've not provided any yet.

In the early 2010's I don't believe PD or any dev team even comprehended the quality of 3D models we'd have today. Heck most teams, be it console or PC, are still building new models that are comparable with PD's output on PS3.

Car models back then were being created that are far greater than what would be usable in a game today. PD stressed that they had those models and scaled them down. There is evidence the cars that are in GT6 and in GT7 are based off the same models.

PD have always had a good handle on car proportions dating back to the PS1/2 days. In the early 2010's HD era they produced good looking models. But we're on a different level these days, with the finer details, interiors, and so on.

And???

You clearly don't have a deep grasp of how this works, so either provide the actual evidence and not a link to a thread where there's actually ecidence you're wrong and we can either discuss this further or we can either move on or go around in circles again.

 

[Nathan88]

That doesn't prove anything, although I will give you the tracks from the PS3 era appear to have been mostly redone, the cars however...

I've mentioned it once, but I know what it is and what it does.

10 years ago they had car models that far surpass what the PS5 can render in a 20 car race.

Is it? Or are you making gross assumptions without any actual evidence, beucase you've not provided any yet.

Car models back then were being created that are far greater than what would be usable in a game today. PD stressed that they had those models and scaled them down. There is evidence the cars that are in GT6 and in GT7 are based off the same models.

And???

You clearly don't have a deep grasp of how this works, so either provide the actual evidence and not a link to a thread where there's actually ecidence you're wrong and we can either discuss this further or we can either move on or go around in circles again.

Your premise seems to be a handful of GTS/GT7 cars share 3D assets with their Premium counterparts. Why wouldn't they? If PD can carry over some work they will. The fact is after a decade there are still dozens of Premium cars missing, heavily suggesting porting models is a complex and time consuming task. By contrast today's cars can be ported across generations with little work, by using higher LOD models.

If you think in the 2010's PD where making 3D car models to standards that, to this day, blow away the competition, fair play. I think PD where in an absolute state during the PS3 era. Remastering PS2 assets, remaking multiple Premium models. Then coming to the conclusion their cars & tracks wouldn't be suitable for the upcoming 4K/8K era.

 

[Tornado]

Is this another "PD are definitely working on a PC port of GT7" attempt at a flex?

 

[Dave A]

Your premise seems to be a handful of GTS/GT7 cars share 3D assets with their Premium counterparts. Why wouldn't they? If PD can carry over some work they will.

Glad you understand, because they did.

The fact is after a decade there are still dozens of Premium cars missing, heavily suggesting porting over models is a complex and time consuming task.

You're extraoplating that A + B must equal C but that isn't the case at all. If that's all you have to go on you do not have an argument. There are many, many reasons one game will feature licensed content that another game will not.

If you think in the 2010's PD where making 3D car models to standards that, to this day, blow away the competition, fair play.

I never mentioned the competition, only that they had car models that far surpassed the models needed for PS3 and surpass what we see on PS5. Come one man, this isn't a difficult concenpt. You are aware of how far agead 3d modelling technology is overall compared to how much of that data a games console can render on the fly at 60fps aren't you?

I think PD where in an absolute state during the PS3 era. Remastering PS2 assets, remaking multiple Premium models.

Good for you I guess.

Then coming to the conclusion their cars & tracks wouldn't be suitable for the upcoming 4K/8K era.

Proof please? You made the claim, you need to provide the proof of that or to stop presenting you're view as fact.

Today's cars can be ported across generations with little work, by using higher LOD models.

Proof please? You made the claim, you need to provide the proof of that or to stop presenting you're view as fact.

May I remind you that you stated:

Pretty much everything from GTS onwards was rebuilt from the ground up.

A claim for which you have yet to provide a shred of proof of, yet one you insist on pursuing.

Is this another "PD are definitely working on a PC port of GT7" attempt at a flex?

Who knows, but I want x to happen or y to be the case = x is happening or y is the case is a common these with this guy.

 

[Tornado]

Remastering PS2 assets,

lol what? There was certainly a lot of stuff directly ported across engines with no attempt at quality control (to the extent that a lot of detail stuff was broken in the process and never fixed) but I'm really struggling to think of anything that was "remastered" when GT5 came out.

 

[A Night Away]

lol what? There was certainly a lot of stuff directly ported across engines with no attempt at quality control (to the extent that a lot of detail stuff was broken in the process and never fixed) but I'm really struggling to think of anything that was "remastered" when GT5 came out.

I guess one can count the 'new' cars that come over from GT PSP and were subsequently made premium, but otherwise, I can't think of much else.

 

[Nathan88]

Glad you understand, because they did.

You're extraoplating that A + B must equal C but that isn't the case at all. If that's all you have to go on you do not have an argument. There are many, many reasons one game will feature licensed content that another game will not.

I never mentioned the competition, only that they had car models that far surpassed the models needed for PS3 and surpass what we see on PS5. Come one man, this isn't a difficult concenpt. You are aware of how far agead 3d modelling technology is overall compared to how much of that data a games console can render on the fly at 60fps aren't you?

Good for you I guess.

Proof please? You made the claim, you need to provide the proof of that or to stop presenting you're view as fact.

Proof please? You made the claim, you need to provide the proof of that or to stop presenting you're view as fact.


Who knows, but I want x to happen or y to be the case = x is happening or y is the case is a common these with this guy.

Struggling to understand why you're being so argumentative. Your mate up above was even contesting the existence of PS6! It all seems petty and unnecessary.

Back on topic, I'm well aware 3D modeling tech is capable of more than what we see in the world of games. I also have a bridge to sell you if you think PD where building a library of 3D car models in the 2010's that are now being ported straight into GT7. We're now over a decade on from this period. It's time to accept any cars that arrive in GT7 have been rebuilt or undergone extensive improvements.

BTW, there's no need to argue every point I make. It's perfectly obvious if car models are good enough for 4K scapes photography, they'll be good enough for 4K/8K games. Future graphical improvements will be in the areas of lighting, effects, textures etc.

lol what? There was certainly a lot of stuff directly ported across engines with no attempt at quality control (to the extent that a lot of detail stuff was broken in the process and never fixed) but I'm really struggling to think of anything that was "remastered" when GT5 came out.

You do realise a number of PS2 era cars & tracks received updates for PS3?

 

[Tornado]

Struggling to understand why you're being so argumentative.

Probably because you're (again) insisting things must be true and refusing to back down when asked for something beyond "I know about these things, trust me;" but I don't want to speak on Dave A's behalf.

Your mate up above was even contesting the existence of PS6! It all seems petty and unnecessary.

Oh, you mean this:

I have no idea what the latter part even means - AMD's most recent "roadmap" went to 2024 - but the PS6 has not "been leaked in legal documents".

Microsoft opined in its FTC defence for the Activision Blizzard acquisition that 2028 is "the expected starting period of the next generation of consoles" (no mention of what consoles).

Sony stated, in its evidence to the CMA on the same topic last year, that ""Microsoft has offered to continue making Activision's games available on PlayStation only until 2027. Likewise, in public comments just on October 26, Microsoft said that it plans to offer Call of Duty on PlayStation only as long as it makes sense. A period until 2027 - or some other (possibly shorter) time that Microsoft unilaterally determines makes sense to Microsoft is badly inadequate. By the time that SIE launched the next generation of its PlayStation console (which is likely to occur around ⬛⬛⬛⬛), it would have lost access to Call of Duty and other Activision titles".

That suggests that Sony is not anticipating the next PlayStation (whatever it's called) any earlier than 2027. 2027/8 is about what a reasonable person would expect given console life spans to date (PS1 1994-2006; PS2 2000-2013; PS3 2007-2016; PS4 2013-2023*; PS5 2020-present), so that may well be what happens, but at no point has the PS6 "been leaked" in these hearings, nor has any date for it.


*I'm not sure if the PS4's end of production has happened officially yet, but it was on the slate for this year

Because I noticed you didn't actually respond to that in spite of it tearing apart the basis for your claim of how Sony and AMD already has the PS6 all planned out for debut 5 years from now.







Plus, to be frank, at this point there's not even cause to simply assume either company will go with AMD again across the board for the next console generation in the first place. Those things are things that Sony and Microsoft are taking under consideration right now or in the near future. Right now AMD is neither the performance leader nor the trend setter nor the budget option; as well as lagging far behind in the AI-based image generation technologies that will greatly benefit game consoles in a transformative way that a higher TFLOPs number won't.

We're now over a decade on from this period. It's time to accept any cars that arrive in GT7 have been rebuilt or undergone extensive improvements.

"I'm not going to actually respond to the request for proof of the things I'm claiming, but you should consider this argument settled in my favor anyway."

You do realise a number of PS2 era cars & tracks received updates for PS3?

"A number," huh? Fascinating.





I sure hope you don't mean "updates for PS3" to mean the game of whack a mole PD were playing trying to fix the LoD setup for a number of Standard cars that they broke in the asset porting process so they looked significantly worse in GT5 than they did in GT3 and GT4.

 

[Dave A]

Struggling to understand why you're being so argumentative.

Beucase you're making baselss claims without proving any evidence and when asked for evidence you're doing a bad job of ignoring it.

Your mate up above was even contesting the existence of PS6! It all seems petty and unnecessary.

Yes, he countered another baseless claim you made.

Back on topic, I'm well aware 3D modeling tech is capable of more than what we see in the world of games. I also have a bridge to sell you if you think PD where building a library of 3D car models in the 2010's that are now being ported straight into GT7.

I never said anything about them porting car models from 2010 straight into GT7, though it depends on what you mean by the term "ported straight into" how I'd respond to that. Let me remind you, you stated this:

Pretty much everything from GTS onwards was rebuilt from the ground up.

Following which, I asked this:

Do you actually have proof of this? Because the evidence suggests otherwise.

And I'm still waiting for that proof.

We're now over a decade on from this period. It's time to accept any cars that arrive in GT7 have been rebuilt or undergone extensive improvements.

This does not = proof.

BTW, there's no need to argue every point I make.

I don't argue every point you make, I'm fairly sure I've agreed and liked some of your posts in the past. However, you have a tendancy to project what you think and what you wish for as factual regardless of any contrasting points raised/evidenced. If you make a bold claim, the onus is on you to prove it.

It's perfectly obvious if car models are good enough for 4K scapes photography, they'll be good enough for 4K/8K games. Future graphical improvements will be in the areas of lighting, effects, textures etc.

You don't know what you are talking about.

You do realise a number of PS2 era cars & tracks received updates for PS3?

I'm honestly not sure what that has to do with you claiming:

Pretty much everything from GTS onwards was rebuilt from the ground up.

 

[Famine]

Your mate up above was even contesting the existence of PS6!

No, I wasn't. I was providing the real background of the things you've reinterpreted and presented as something else.

If you'd actually read my post you'd know that - the last paragraph contains my opinion that 2027/8 is a reasonable guess for PS6, so to decide I was "contesting the existence" of it is either chronic inability to read or a lie. But then if you'd actually read your own evidence you wouldn't have made the claim.

The part I don't know about is "AMD's roadmap" you claim also "leaked" the PS6 - I can't find anything beyond 2024 - though if it's anything like the level of the "leaked in legal documents" which was nothing of the sort, I expect a highly generous interpretation of something considerably more vague.

 

[Tornado]

This does not = proof.

Especially considering their main competitor in this space actually came out and said "rebuilt from the ground up" twice; which was quickly found out to be false in spite of how much people tried to insist it was true in 2013. Luckily it was much more obviously a lie the second time so only a couple of people are trying to die with that ship.








It's marketing fluff; no different to when a car manufacturer claims a new model of car is "85% new parts" from the model it replaced and you look at it and it's so obviously derived from the previous generation that you can probably swap the doors.

 

[Nathan88]

Probably because you're (again) insisting things must be true and refusing to back down when asked for something beyond "I know about these things, trust me;" but I don't want to speak on Dave A's behalf.

I'm not stating anything controversial. It's widely acknowledged GTS was massively down on content as PD rebuilt much of it from the ground up. Ground up will always be a subjective term, but the number of cars & tracks speak for themselves. A decade on there are dozens of Premium models absent. We've had a trickle return in much updated form alongside all new cars to the franchise.

I'm aware 3D models on a handful of new cars share characteristics with their Premium equivalent. There are just as many examples where the 3D model has been comprehensively upgraded. Full tessellation was only applied to a fraction of Premium cars.

Oh, you mean this:

No, I was referring to Voodoovaj's statement we may not even get a PS6, or it could be a streaming machine. Both pretty outlandish claims.

Because I noticed you didn't actually respond to that in spite of it tearing apart the basis for your claim of how Sony and AMD already has the PS6 all planned out for debut 5 years from now.

Said legal documents have been widely reported in videogame & tech circles. Respected outlets like Digital Foundry acknowledge this is a reference to a PS6 release in 2028. Similarly MS revealed the imminent release of the discless PS5 SKU. Both claims corroborated by respected journalist Tom Henderson (a 100% track record on PlayStation hardware plans) & AMD insider Kepler.

PS5 Pro development reportedly started early '22, with teams already having demo events, and dev kits arriving Nov '23. In effect we're only 3 years away from the PS6 hardware design needing to be finalised.

Plus, to be frank, at this point there's not even cause to simply assume either company will go with AMD again across the board for the next console generation in the first place. Those things are things that Sony and Microsoft are taking under consideration right now or in the near future. Right now AMD is neither the performance leader nor the trend setter nor the budget option; as well as lagging far behind in the AI-based image generation technologies that will greatly benefit game consoles in a transformative way that a higher TFLOPs number won't.

PlayStation use custom hardware and often implement their own solutions. These can be adopted by AMD for future PC GPU designs. Mark Cerny has secured patents for Sony's own solution for improved RT performance, there's speculation this could be used over AMD's implementation. There's also the need for 100% Backwards Compatibility, which is much easier if they remain with AMD.

"A number," huh? Fascinating.

I sure hope you don't mean "updates for PS3" to mean the game of whack a mole PD were playing trying to fix the LoD setup for a number of Standard cars that they broke in the asset porting process so they looked significantly worse in GT5 than they did in GT3 and GT4.

You're missing my wider point. During GT5 & GT6 development PD where working with multiple model quality tiers, be they originally built for PS2 or PS3. Both titles came in for intense criticism for their inconsistencies. Another reason why it made sense for them to start afresh with GTS and the 4K era.

You don't know what you are talking about.

What is there to dispute? Current 3D car models will be carried across into next-gen. We have reached a plateau for in-game 3D modelling. High LOD photomode models can pass for the real thing in 4K Scapes. On occasions when they do approach uncanny valley, it tends to be lighting & shadow inconsistencies.

As we move onto PS6 4K will remain the standard. 8K will be supported (as it's claimed on PS5 Pro), but as with 8K TV/Film, this will largely be upscaled content to make best use of the increased resolution. The next visual jump will come from greater use of RT and even full Path Tracing. Together with higher quality, more complex, visual effects such as particles for tyre smoke, rain, dust etc.

No, I wasn't. I was providing the real background of the things you've reinterpreted and presented as something else.

If you'd actually read my post you'd know that - the last paragraph contains my opinion that 2027/8 is a reasonable guess for PS6, so to decide I was "contesting the existence" of it is either chronic inability to read or a lie. But then if you'd actually read your own evidence you wouldn't have made the claim.

As you will have read above, I was not referring to your post. Rather someone who was contesting the existence of PS6 and it's form factor. A statement that did not garner much scrutiny despite it's far fetched nature.

The information revealed in legal documents is the classic definition of a leak. With the release timeframes for PS6 and the discless PS5 being corroborated by respected external sources. At this point I'd put it at 95% likelihood discless PS5 will release in Q4 '23, PS5 Pro Q4 '24, PS6 '28. Others will want further evidence and I perfectly respect that.

 

[Voodoovaj]

It's my understanding that the PS5 version of the game is designed to stream environments directly from the SSD, whereas the PS4 version has to load them from the HDD into active memory - which requires a significantly different approach to file storage and access, much as games designed to run different processes through the different Cell cores on PS3 require redevelopment for PS4/5 remasters - and that it was indeed designed for PS5 before being ported to PS4, hence the change in advertising from it being a PS5 exclusive to not being that by mid-2021.

Yes, however, the methods of streaming from the SDD or loading from the HDD are not things that within the realm of post launch support.

Post launch support revolves around bug fixed and content. With the PS4 version being quite obviously a branch of GTSport, it's already been through many years of bug fixing. The PS5, having the newer features, would be the most at risk, or in need of, code support. Content is no biggie between the two since as far as I can tell, it's 100% the same.

I'm skeptical of the "port" from PS5 to PS4. If there were no version on PS4 to begin with, then I could see it, but given the situation (GT Sport already running), it seems more like marketing to make it seem like they did something when, really, there isn't that much to do.

WHICH all brings me back to my original point, that there is no good reason to NOT make another. Most of the assets are done, the new assets required are on the low end of the cost scale, and there's still enough demand to keep it profitable. In fact, there might even be enough demand to make the next version cross platform yet again...all the infrastructure is in place with very little cost required.

 

[poptarts-]

My prediction is that the target would be a launch title for the next platform. The timing seems to line up with industry predictions for the next console generation. I am also hoping that we'll get some improvements if Sony decides to push out a PS5 Pro next year. It'd be great for performance mode to look a wee bit nicer.

 

[Voodoovaj]

There are many dozens of GT6 Premium models that have not been seen in GTS/GT7. Those we have seen have undergone substantial updates.

What are the chances of seeing the GT6 premium's in GT7?

A number of GT5P/GTHD era models had to be heavily redone due to how early they were; case in point, the R32 GT-R's interior: Later models (from GT5 Spec II/DLC era to GT6 era models, mainly the tessellated cars) seem to be more next-gen ready though, case in point being the Z8:

www.gtplanet.net

Many of those "comprehensive" upgrades are the change in lighting models and not upgrades at all.

As for whether we do or do not see those cars is going to come down to licensing costs. Like, they're going to give us an ambulance...is there a thread somewhere asking for this? Or is that a freebee license from Toyota?

PD have been striving for future proofed 3D models since the HD era, when it became clear it was unsustainable to rebuild an entire car list, for each new console generation.

Exactly - Even if there is a need to make changes, it's no where near the effort required for making a single model back in the early days. 100% reuse is going to be the desired outcome.

Car & track 3D models for GTS are the ones than can be brought forward into PS5/PS6. I'd go as far to say I can't see any need to touch the car models moving forward. Tracks are slightly different, the base 3D model, including grandstands, are fine.

So, you agree - There's more than enough assets to be reused to make another version an economic slam dunk.

But they can still bump up texture quality, add denser, more detailed crowds, trackside vehicles & objects.

Much of that, like trees, are procedural and don't impact the budget much, if at all.

Again, on the topic of the thread, at this point it's more about why they WOULD NOT make another rather than if they would.



EDIT - In light of today's update, let's have a look at a blatant carry over of GT5 assets to GT7.

'58 Corvette photographed in GT5



'58 Corvette in GT7 (PS4) (if you add the rollcage, it's the exact same as the one in GT5). I wish I could the same size wheel and tire combo, and I wish I could lower it the same, but I suppose that would infringe on the original SEMA car license

 

[A Night Away]

As for whether we do or do not see those cars is going to come down to licensing costs.

As shown by the Lotus saga, where it was clear Polyphony and Sony could absolutely pony up the dollars to pay for the licensing costs that Lotus were asking, but didn't...

 

[Dave A]

I'm not stating anything controversial.

No, you're stating your opinion, however accurate/inaccurate that may be, as fact, without being able to provide a shred of evidence to back up your claims.

It's widely acknowledged GTS was massively down on content as PD rebuilt much of it from the ground up.

At launch, GT Sport features a number of cars proted from GT6 and a handfull of tracks ported from GT6 with a fair bit of new content. Then over time a slew of other cars from GT6 were also ported.

Ground up will always be a subjective term,

No it won't, it means exactly what it means, something rebuilt from ground up, i.e. completely rebuilt.

the number of cars & tracks speak for themselves. A decade on there are dozens of Premium models absent. We've had a trickle return in much updated form alongside all new cars to the franchise.

I honestly don't know if you're deliberately trolling now. The number of cars can mean a wide number of things. And the doezens of premium cars still absent can also mean a wide number of things, what about the large number that have been reused.

I'm aware 3D models on a handful of new cars share characteristics with their Premium equivalent. There are just as many examples where the 3D model has been comprehensively upgraded. Full tessellation was only applied to a fraction of Premium cars.

Yes, they share meshes.

No, I was referring to Voodoovaj's statement we may not even get a PS6, or it could be a streaming machine. Both pretty outlandish claims.

So you missed his point? He wasn't making an outlandish claim, he was making a point and did so without using absolutes.

You're missing my wider point. During GT5 & GT6 development PD where working with multiple model quality tiers, be they originally built for PS2 or PS3. Both titles came in for intense criticism for their inconsistencies. Another reason why it made sense for them to start afresh with GTS and the 4K era.

Again, do you have actual evidence of this? Or are you spouting your opinion as fact and arguing it is fact for some inconceivable reason.

What is there to dispute? Current 3D car models will be carried across into next-gen. We have reached a plateau for in-game 3D modelling. High LOD photomode models can pass for the real thing in 4K Scapes. On occasions when they do approach uncanny valley, it tends to be lighting & shadow inconsistencies.

I'm sure current 3d models can, just like the models that they created 10 years ago are still in use. This happens, new models are added to the library and old models are reused, improved when needed, it's not ground up work, mostly it's textures, materials and lighting. Car models 10 years ago made from millions of polygons were being made you know.

 

[Voodoovaj]

As shown by the Lotus saga, where it was clear Polyphony and Sony could absolutely pony up the dollars to pay for the licensing costs that Lotus were asking, but didn't...

Ya exactly. Even if it's dirt cheap, is it worth making the investment? Great example is Lotus. in all honesty, do you think they would sell more copies if they included Lotus? I'd like to see it, but I don't think it would move the needle on sales at all.

It's all about the $$$$$$. This game is a money factory, so why stop?

 

[jonoholland29]

In an article Jordan posted a few years ago the data they use creates vehicles with 70,000,000 polygons and they have to reduce it to 70,000 to make the 8k versions we have in GT7

 

[Remy Zero]

At this stage, they should remaster GT4 to win back the classic fans.

 

[nickf1gr]

At this stage, they should remaster GT4 to win back the classic fans.

This would be instant hit same a GTA V when it released!!!!!

 

[Keroyon]

At this stage, they should remaster GT4 to win back the classic fans.

I agree but only as long as they don't butcher it like rockstar (grove street games) did with their GTA trilogy !

 

[Clinton Ducks]

At this stage, they should remaster GT4 to win back the classic fans.

Honestly I don’t think that’s the way forward - quite the opposite, it’d be a big step back. Although that being said, they do want to look at what made 4 such a firm favourite and make it more about the big and comprehensive career mode.

And also, possible controversial opinion incoming, concentrate on new (and/or old) tracks for a while rather than keep adding new cars. There’s plenty of cars for now, a bit of something for everybody. There’s just not enough of… everything else!

 

[SU_Tempest]

At this stage, they should remaster GT4 to win back the classic fans.

I'm gonna be honest here, no they shouldn't. "Remaster the old game," even if it's arguably the best GT has ever been, isn't going to be the massive and instant hit everyone thinks it will, because it will be compared to the idealized version of Gran Turismo 4 fans of the game remember, not just GT4 as it stands.

If they DID do remaster GT4, we will get... a pretty-looking game with 6 cars on track, no Ferrari, no Lamborghini, no McLaren, no Porsche, no damage, no weather other than sunny or mildly cloudy on all tracks (except for the one version of Tsukuba in the wet), and virtually no customization besides rims and a lackluster choice of wings. You know, all those things the fans complained about back when GT4 released? I know, I was around!

Just about the only good things we'd get back is a decent track selection (although there will be some to complain there won't be enough real-life ones/too many fictional or street circuits) and a healthier spread of events. But even then. We could do better than what has been done in the past.

For better or for worse, GT7 is still the culmination of some advancements that should not be dismissed. If your definition of "remaster" is going to include the advancements we got over the years, including those present in GT7, then it's not Gran Turismo 4: Remastered you want. It's a brand-new game, it's - arguably - what 7 should have been. Just arguing "We should just get the previous game I like best again" is, well... not wanting to get out of your comfort zone.

Yes, GT7 has problems, but none of them are "It's not Gran Turismo 4." All I wish fans would do is make an effort, get out of their comfort zone, and not say things like "Just remake GT4" or expect "the same game as the old ones but better." Not only is it never gonna happen, but even if it did, are you sure that's what you want?

They should absolutely bother to make a new game. Emphasis on bother to, because GT7 really does not leave me with the impression they bothered very much at all. It's not GT4 Again we want, it's just a fricking good Gran Turismo game, that's all.

 

[A Night Away]

People are also saying 'remaster the old games' like the entirety of the series post 2004 isn't chasing the highs in terms of series penetration and content/gameplay that GT4 has.

Literally, every numbered GT title has basically been a rehash of GT4 by this point. If not in terms of structure, then absolutely in terms of cars, tracks, the lot.

 

[aguia]

Qual virá primeiro, GT8 ou Playstation 6?

Maybe a New game " Pikes Peak to the clouds" for PS5,,, and I buy one.

 

[Tornado]

There's no reason to remaster a classic game in a series that has fundamentally been the same game in every main entry since inception. Remastering GT4 would be the lazy solution to just making GT7 or GT8 or whatever a better game.

I'm not stating anything controversial. It's widely acknowledged GTS was massively down on content as PD rebuilt much of it from the ground up.

The elephant in the room being that it's "widely acknowledged" that Sony's return to the PC market has been massively profitable for them and it was a mistake to completely divest themselves from the market in the mid-2010s.





That still didn't mean it's proof that a PC version of Gran Turismo was well into development, no matter how many months you insisted that A meant B.

Ground up will always be a subjective term,

Not really, which is why Turn 10 is getting so much crap right now for claiming it a second time; but yes I actually already delved into this, thank you.

No, I was referring to Voodoovaj's statement we may not even get a PS6, or it could be a streaming machine. Both pretty outlandish claims.

So because Famine's post was inconvenient for the evidence that you didn't actually know the meaning of, you ignored it. Gotcha.

Said legal documents have been widely reported in videogame & tech circles. Respected outlets like Digital Foundry acknowledge this is a reference to a PS6 release in 2028. Similarly MS revealed the imminent release of the discless PS5 SKU. Both claims corroborated by respected journalist Tom Henderson (a 100% track record on PlayStation hardware plans) & AMD insider Kepler.

So you still don't actually know what those legal documents were saying even though Famine told you as much. This would be where actually reading responses given to you would allow you to learn things rather than your typical pattern of claiming things make sense to do so obviously Sony/PD that's what happened and then complaining when people don't submit to your assertions henceforth.

PlayStation use custom hardware and often implement their own solutions. These can be adopted by AMD for future PC GPU designs. Mark Cerny has secured patents for Sony's own solution for improved RT performance, there's speculation this could be used over AMD's implementation.

That's a cool story bro but what I said remains true. If Intel comes up with some sort of unified system solution in 2024/2025 when Microsoft and Sony are finalizing business relationships with technology partners and they are still ahead of AMD on price and still ahead of AMD on AI-based technologies and ahead on AMD on power usage, it would be illogical for them to say "well that's great but they're not AMD so..." If nVidia is still running laps ahead of AMD on AI technologies (which they almost certainly will be) and are still ahead on ray tracing and are interested in expanding back into the console space following their successful venture with Nintendo, it would be laughable for Sony or Microsoft to dismiss them out of hand because they're not AMD.

There's also the need for 100% Backwards Compatibility, which is much easier if they remain with AMD.

If Sony is so incompetent with the design of their next x86 box that they need specifically stick with one flavor of x86 box (regardless of AMD's market position at the time they make that decision) to maintain compatibility with hardware they developed in the first place then I'm not sure what Cerny is even doing there.

You're missing my wider point. During GT5 & GT6 development PD where working with multiple model quality tiers, be they originally built for PS2 or PS3. Both titles came in for intense criticism for their inconsistencies. Another reason why it made sense for them to start afresh with GTS and the 4K era.

Nah. I see you trying to weasel out of this, but when you were responding to me you weren't making a "wider point." You were doubling down on a specific claim after I questioned it. I know it wasn't part of a wider point because when you reiterated that it was true you did so separately from everything else you were trying to regurgitate at Dave A.


So let's go back to it:

You do realise a number of PS2 era cars & tracks received updates for PS3?

What cars? What tracks? You certainly seemed to think you had basis for insisting that PD did such a thing because you repeated it as if it was tautological; even though you were directing this argument at people who were actually on this forum when GT5 came out and were actually there when people were examining every Standard car with a microscope (as opposed to someone who joined the forum less than a year ago) from the second they were first shown in the Standard Cars Trailer because people had been convinced that the Standard Cars were going to be higher quality models that had to be cut down to work in GT3/GT4.



Did you think that PD fixing bugs they introduced with cars porting them to PS3 so they looked significantly worse than they did on PS2 was actually PD improving the car models from their original quality, and are trying to change the subject now so you don't look foolish when what they actually did was pointed out to you? Because you're not really doing a very good job avoiding that as is.

 

[Remy Zero]

I'm gonna be honest here, no they shouldn't. "Remaster the old game," even if it's arguably the best GT has ever been, isn't going to be the massive and instant hit everyone thinks it will, because it will be compared to the idealized version of Gran Turismo 4 fans of the game remember, not just GT4 as it stands.

If they DID do remaster GT4, we will get... a pretty-looking game with 6 cars on track, no Ferrari, no Lamborghini, no McLaren, no Porsche, no damage, no weather other than sunny or mildly cloudy on all tracks (except for the one version of Tsukuba in the wet), and virtually no customization besides rims and a lackluster choice of wings. You know, all those things the fans complained about back when GT4 released? I know, I was around!

Just about the only good things we'd get back is a decent track selection (although there will be some to complain there won't be enough real-life ones/too many fictional or street circuits) and a healthier spread of events. But even then. We could do better than what has been done in the past.

For better or for worse, GT7 is still the culmination of some advancements that should not be dismissed. If your definition of "remaster" is going to include the advancements we got over the years, including those present in GT7, then it's not Gran Turismo 4: Remastered you want. It's a brand-new game, it's - arguably - what 7 should have been. Just arguing "We should just get the previous game I like best again" is, well... not wanting to get out of your comfort zone.

Yes, GT7 has problems, but none of them are "It's not Gran Turismo 4." All I wish fans would do is make an effort, get out of their comfort zone, and not say things like "Just remake GT4" or expect "the same game as the old ones but better." Not only is it never gonna happen, but even if it did, are you sure that's what you want?

They should absolutely bother to make a new game. Emphasis on bother to, because GT7 really does not leave me with the impression they bothered very much at all. It's not GT4 Again we want, it's just a fricking good Gran Turismo game, that's all.

Actually my apologies. I do not really mean they should literally remaster GT4. What i did mean however, at this stage, anything seems to be better than GT7. I'm seriously disgusted at the way PD is treating all of us, and taking us for a ride.

An ambulance? seriously, is that what the game needs now?? Yea an ambulance is much better than proper events to run GR2 and GR1 cars.

It's been so long since I fired up the game, and have zero intention to do at at the moment.

Honestly I don’t think that’s the way forward - quite the opposite, it’d be a big step back. Although that being said, they do want to look at what made 4 such a firm favourite and make it more about the big and comprehensive career mode.

And also, possible controversial opinion incoming, concentrate on new (and/or old) tracks for a while rather than keep adding new cars. There’s plenty of cars for now, a bit of something for everybody. There’s just not enough of… everything else!

Look at post #150