GT4 or Forza? Which one do you think will take the crown?

[Phil]

Pepto-Bismol:

Oh dear, we're running in circles now. Instead of bringing up business ideals, why don't you just go and play the game (Gran Turismo 4 prologue with the logitech wheel with all the assistents turned off) and then come back with other arguments other than a belief - because that's what it really is. You're not going to convince me by stating what sells and what doesn't. I have played the game, I have driven cars (and they range easily above a 206) under extreme situations. You don't need to tell me that there are differences, but anyone that has such experience can compare them with the game for themselves as well as with other efforts on the market. Gran Turismo 4 (prologue) is in entirely different world.

As I already said in a previous post: your view on the series is quite the contradiction to the man Kazunori Yamauchi portraits himself.

I think not before you actually state some of the things of the game that you perceive as not realistic and rather reflects 'our perception of reality' - this whole argument won't proceed very far. Just out of curiousity: which Gran Turismo games have you effectively played? And most importantly, with a controller or the logitech wheel (which one? GT4 or GT3 one). All of this of course makes a big difference on how the game is perceived.

Just to say things again: Gran Turismo isn't the end of be all and certainly not a simulator to the extent some people are probably expecting it. The attention to detail and the realism surrounding the cars and their behaviour on the track is astonishing. It's certainly a lot more 'real' than any other game I've played (take out arcade 355, haven't played that one for too long to effectively judge). Gran Turismo 4 takes this a lot further then the previous parts ever did.

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

Oh dear, we're running in circles now.

On this point we agree. But as for the rest, I'm not so sure we disagree ...

I think we're saying pretty much the same thing -- with a different rhetoric.

Instead of bringing up business ideals, why don't you just go and play the game (Gran Turismo 4 prologue with the logitech wheel with all the assistents turned off) and then come back with other arguments other than a belief - because that's what it really is. You're not going to convince me by stating what sells and what doesn't.

It's not a business ideal. It is reality. The only loyalty a for-profit entity has is to money.

But what are your thoughts? After playing Prologue, do you think GT4 will be more or less expensive than its predecessor?

While I have not played the game, I can say with surety that it will be costlier. Putting aside the (quantum) leap in photorealism and vehicle response and the much publicized visits to exotic locales with famous racing circuits and rare automobiles, GT3's successor is being earmarked with more features, more vehicles and more circuits.

If I'm right (and GT4 is more expensive than its predecessor), then how will SCEI pay its bills without targeting a wider demographic? Are you and the other gearheads willing to pay more for the next game?

I didn't think so.

As I already said in a previous post: your view on the series is quite the contradiction to the man Kazunori Yamauchi portraits himself.

From a business perspective, Polyphony Digital Inc.'s board of directors (and its stockholder, SCEI, to whom they report) can fire the company president and replace him or her with another one. Furthermore, as the game's publisher, SCEI will instruct the producer as to who, what, when, where and how it wants their game to be made. Granted, while Kaz & Co. may have more leeway than the traditional first-party developer (and access to Sony Group resources), this hierarchy remains crystal clear. Capisce?

So even though his handiwork may include some of the most recognizable icons in the interactive entertainment industry, Kaz is still a president and a producer ... with a boss. :|

Just out of curiousity: which Gran Turismo games have you effectively played?

"Uh, your honor, my client wishes to plead the Fifth by reason of sanity."

Gran Turismo isn't the end of be all and certainly not a simulator to the extent some people are probably expecting it. The attention to detail and the realism surrounding the cars and their behaviour on the track is astonishing. It's certainly a lot more 'real' than any other game I've played

We agree more than we disagree.

• We both think Gran Turismo spin offs are idiosyncratic. At the time of their release, there are no close substitutes.
  
• We both agree that the franchise isn't wholly dedicated to simulation. A part (of a part of a part) of a bona fide simulator, like to those concocted by automobile manufacturers, could not exist in such a Spartan environment. And even if they could, the scientific principles upon which they're founded are fairly well-known and *gasp* repeatable -- evil qualities that could make the whole experience more generic and less unique.

Why Sony seems to be doing what they are doing is where we are at odds...

 

[dantruon]

I just saw a DVD from Gamepro on thsi year E3 and this is my opinion about teh two games.

FORZA - Look nice, lovely physics and AI, nice cares and track too

Gran Turisomo 4 - OMG OMG OMG are u serious, the Grand canyon track make me look at my PS2 to make sure is not a PC or something because i can tell from the video trailer that it look way better than Forza in term of car model and animation.

This is my 2 cents so dont flame me.

To me Forza just a Gran Turismo 3.5

 

[-tkf-]

But what are your thoughts? After playing Prologue, do you think GT4 will be more or less expensive than its predecessor?

If I'm right (and GT4 is more expensive than its predecessor), then how will SCEI pay its bills without targeting a wider demographic? Are you and the other gearheads willing to pay more for the next game?

I'm not so sure you know what you are talking about.. anyway, since we are already in the crop circle land here...

After playing Prologue and watching the sales numbers i think you can safely asume that GT4 is making lots of money already, and it's not even been released

And considering WHEN GT3 was released and the number of PS2 owners there was back then, it's safe to asume that GT4 will sell even more than GT3, more hype way better game even if they do seem to be going for a more "hardcore" racing style, of course with the GT series it's always been possible to race it arcadish or in simulation style, i guess it's thanks to the superior physics engine and just plain understanding of what makes it easy/hard to drive a car in a game.

I just don't think that anything can beat GT4 except.. GT5 , hell GT3 is still the best game out there only GT4rologue can touch it.

 

[Phil]

Pepto-Bismol:

It's not a business ideal. It is reality. The only loyalty a for-profit entity has is to money.

Of course, of course. What I am saying however, doesn't necessarely contradict that in any way. In fact, what I am arguing is, is that Polyphony was able to pull off a game that is both realistic and appeals to both the hardcore and the average gamer (see my points listed on page 3 about bad A.I., driving assistents and lacking damage and most importantly playing with a wheel etc).

But what are your thoughts? After playing Prologue, do you think GT4 will be more or less expensive than its predecessor?

Playing devils advocat here : What makes you think that it being more 'realistic' makes it more expensive at the same time? Since I have actually played the game, I can effectively claim that it the cars and their behaviour is a lot more realistic and sophisticated. Everything else is an after thought, one I'm still not quite convinced I should be making given the results I'm seeing (and that is GT4p).

If I'm right (and GT4 is more expensive than its predecessor), then how will SCEI pay its bills without targeting a wider demographic? Are you and the other gearheads willing to pay more for the next game?

This is where we still disagree. My entire point is that it being realistic doesn't necessarely contradict it being targeted at a "wider demographic". The "wider demographic" won't get the logitech wheel and they won't be playing it for hours to effectively master all the cars and tracks. Does it make the game any less appealing to them? No. Does it make the game any less realistic when played in the correct way (with the wheel)? No.

Kaz is still a president and a producer ... with a boss.

As long as he is the president and producer of the best selling Sony 1st party title and among the best selling games on any console, I doubt he will get any less power. In fact, as I already said, its realism doesn't necessarely contradict it being targeted at a wider demographic. The secret to success is to appeal to both (while sharing his vision with the people that effectively play and love the game for the same reasons as he does).

Seriously, I see what you're arguing and there's really nothing much to disagree on (except for the above, hehe) - I just think that playing the game speaks more than anything and I really can't wait for the real thing to come out! Cheers Phil

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

What makes you think that it being more 'realistic' makes it more expensive at the same time? Since I have actually played the game, I can effectively claim that it the cars and their behaviour is a lot more realistic and sophisticated.

Think about it. If the change is THAT obvious, then chances are it has taken more people more time to implement.

As long as he is the president and producer of the best selling Sony 1st party title and among the best selling games on any console, I doubt he will get any less power.

That makes cents. However, Kaz is still an employee who reports to (and takes orders from) his boss. :|

In fact, as I already said, its realism doesn't necessarely contradict it being targeted at a wider demographic. The secret to success is to appeal to both (while sharing his vision with the people that effectively play and love the game for the same reasons as he does).

True. Realism can make the whole experience more compelling. But simulating reality is a different story, as it would introduce facets that appeal to aficionados (like the operation of a clutch for instance) which others would find loathsome.

And it is the latter group that marketeers are beginning to target ...

As the PlayStation brand becomes more mainstream, its consumer base is becoming a microcosm of the world. Hence, casual players outnumber hardcore ones. And there are more PS2 gamers who aren't car buffs than who are.

I just think that playing the game speaks more than anything and I really can't wait for the real thing to come out!

Here, here!

 

[archie4oz]

Think about it. If the change is THAT obvious, then chances are it has taken more people more time to implement.

Not necessarily... GT3 involved a new platform and a dramatic increase in time to construct assets. By the second title lessons learned can be applied optimize production flow and the designers can work on improving game mechanics and implementing new features.

It's pretty much what we did with FF... It got incrementally cheaper to produce and the bulk of the development of the title revolved around content production. Any actual changes to the game mechanics or new features consumed a relatively small amount of time in comparison. Of course when FFX came around it was a whole new platform that gave room for *more* content, the ability to do more with the available processing and memory it involves and good size jump in costs...

That makes cents. However, Kaz is still an employee who reports to (and takes orders from) his boss.

Of a studio in that produced a title (Gran Turismo) that wasn't expected to really generate much sales (and wasn't really planned on being launched outside Japan)... Big surprise! It turns out to be a smash hit garner the Playstation more audience (non-traditional gamers, car buffs, sim buffs, etc)...

True. Realism can make the whole experience more compelling. But simulating reality is a different story, as it would introduce facets that appeal to aficionados (like the operation of a clutch for instance) which others would find loathsome.

And it is the latter group that marketeers are beginning to target ...

Since then they've already done tweaks to the game to make it more palatable to a more broad audience (fattening up the arcade mode, and making the licenses less stringent)... There's not a whole lot you can really do to make it more appealing to a broader audience without alienating the fanbase that got you there. Online play is the only other feature I can think of that can really expand that much.

As the PlayStation brand becomes more mainstream, its consumer base is becoming a microcosm of the world. Hence, casual players outnumber hardcore ones. And there are more PS2 gamers who aren't car buffs than who are

It's already pretty mainstream, and it's library is a reflection of that. Sony's always understood that the casual gamer is the path to greater market share and expanded profitability... They did that with aplomb with the Playstation... However you don't keep tweaking the game into oblivion to appeal to a wider and wider audience. At some point you draw a line and either produce another title that is more appealing to a broader audience, or you throw some support to a 3rd party who's got a hot title that does...

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

Not necessarily... GT3 involved a new platform and a dramatic increase in time to construct assets. By the second title lessons learned can be applied optimize production flow and the designers can work on improving game mechanics and implementing new features.

If all we are talking about is an update, then you'd probably be right -- the development process should become more efficient, less labor intensive and (hopefully) cheaper as well. But judging from its description, Gran Turismo 4 doesn't appear to be an update ...

"Fans of the Gran Turismo series will find everything they loved about the previous games in Gran Turismo 4 and a whole lot more. More cars, more tracks, more racing modes and as well as online play make Gran Turismo 4 one of the most ambitious racing games to date. With the aid of the PlayStation 2's Network Adapter, players are able to interact, chat, and of course race against six other GT4 players. Photorealistic backgrounds take players to locations such as New York City, and the Grand Canyon. Over 500 car models are available to race with, each with handling physics that match their real world counterparts." – GameSpy

Since then they've already done tweaks to the game to make it more palatable to a more broad audience (fattening up the arcade mode, and making the licenses less stringent)... There's not a whole lot you can really do to make it more appealing to a broader audience without alienating the fanbase that got you there.

Aside from adding poker depth to game play (i.e., a mechanic that takes only minutes to learn but a lifetime to master), there are lots of elements the publisher can add to enhance mainstream appeal -- hooks that may or may not be connected to the event itself. Like being able to tote a camera around and take pictures.

However you don't keep tweaking the game into oblivion to appeal to a wider and wider audience. At some point you draw a line and either produce another title that is more appealing to a broader audience, or you throw some support to a 3rd party who's got a hot title that does...

Why not? The goal is to increase profits -- and this ultimately means appealing to a massive audience of casual and non-gamers. Besides, becoming complacent in business (by targeting the same customers) is not the best way to reach sales goals, let alone shatter records.*



* According to the US Census Bureau, there are 6,382,011,245 people in the world ... And SCEI have sold how many copies of Gran Turismo? Certainly, there is considerable room for improvement.

 

[gimmick]

Only time will tell, but it sure does look slim to none that microsoft will topple sony in this department. This whole arguement reminds me of when people were proclaiming that UT was going to detrone quake III.

 

[Phil]

Pepto-Bismol:

If all we are talking about is an update, then you'd probably be right -- the development process should become more efficient, less labor intensive and (hopefully) cheaper as well. But judging from its description, Gran Turismo 4 doesn't appear to be an update ...

In regards to content creation like for the new tracks and cars, perhaps. We must not forget though that the point we were arguing was that higher realism comes at a higher cost. I think it's safe to say that the game mechanics have been a constant improvement since the original Gran Turismo. Physics don't change over time.

However, I believe your point was that a more expensive title requires the targeting of a wider demographic to ensure that their product sells - which is why Polyphony will tone down the 'simulation aspects' of the game over time to make it appeal to a larger audiance?

Lets assume the market is changing though. Games over the last few years have become more and more realistic, mimicing real life more and more as technology moves forward. 15 years ago, we were playing games in 2D with characters with as little capabilities such as jump and run left/right. Today, we have games like Metal Gear Solid (2) that try to come across as realistic as possible - meaning higher quality graphics, but also enemie solders that move around squad based. Did this sense of realism turn anyone off? Doubtful. MGS2 is among the best selling games this generation. As I said, I don't necessarely see how the Gran Turismo series is damned to become a less realistic racer - after all we must not forget one thing:

Gran Turismo has always been about realism. This has always been 'the' selling point of the game. Why change something that has effectively made it the most successful racer? People play Gran Turismo because - it's Gran Turismo. And for those that like it extra realistic - there's the wheel, disabling the driving aids, ABS etc (which is effectively how K. Yamauchi envisions to play the game). I think this works wonderful. Why this can't go hand in hand in the future is, still, beyond me. :?

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

We must not forget though that the point we were arguing was that higher realism comes at a higher cost. I think it's safe to say that the game mechanics have been a constant improvement since the original Gran Turismo. Physics don't change over time.

You're right. Physics don't change. It's just that our understanding of the subject matter -- and ability to implement it -- does.

For this reason, incremental improvements in physics are likely to require geometric increases in time and specialization. In other words, a mushrooming army of experts are needed to tackle increasingly difficult problems for longer and longer periods of time. And experts aren't cheap ...

However, I believe your point was that a more expensive title requires the targeting of a wider demographic to ensure that their product sells - which is why Polyphony will tone down the 'simulation aspects' of the game over time to make it appeal to a larger audiance?

Yes! Yes!

Lets assume the market is changing though. Games over the last few years have become more and more realistic, mimicing real life more and more as technology moves forward. 15 years ago, we were playing games in 2D with characters with as little capabilities such as jump and run left/right. Today, we have games like Metal Gear Solid (2) that try to come across as realistic as possible - meaning higher quality graphics, but also enemie solders that move around squad based. Did this sense of realism turn anyone off? Doubtful.

Sure, video-games are becoming more realistic. It is a consequence of increased technological capacity and spiraling consumer expectation. Nevertheless, the best-selling games aren't wholly dedicated toward this end.



P.S. Metal Gear Solid does its storytelling via *gasp* cinematography, for to simulate real world military reconnaissance would mean crafting a game that is odious to nearly everyone but terrorists and elite soldiers.

 

[wazoo]

it's safe to asume that GT4 will sell even more than GT3

GT sales are pretty much stable.

3. 3,471,837 PS2 Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (Sony)
3,261,557 PSX Gran Turismo (Sony)
3,156,882 PSX Gran Turismo 2 (Sony)

 

[cthellis42]

...and down in Japan, according to MagicBox - 2.54, 1.8, 1.8 (Prologue has sold ~490k) Not sure if there are any easy European numbers to reference...

It'll still likely sell more, but I wouldn't expect enormous gains.

 

[Farid]

...and down in Japan, according to MagicBox - 2.54, 1.8, 1.8 (Prologue has sold ~490k) Not sure if there are any easy European numbers to reference...

It'll still likely sell more, but I wouldn't expect enormous gains.

Actually, GT4 Prologue sold ~750k copies in Japan (746,967 to be exact ).

 

[nasanu]

Pepto-Bismol do you actually believe what you are saying? That if a lot of money is spent on a game then it is not possible for it to be a sim?

Thats is truly absurd.


Either way as I have said before GT games, ALL GT games have by default driving aids turned on effectivly turning them into arcade racers for the casual gamer. Your arguement is totally shot right there.

 

[Phil]

Actually, GT4 Prologue sold ~750k copies in Japan (746,967 to be exact ).

That's insane! The game isn't even a game, but rather a demo of what's to come! Although, I must say, I have spent more time with Prologue than I have with other final racing games!

Would be interesting to see how Prologue sales compare to Gran Turismo: Concept. For some reason, I think Prologue already left Concept in the dust?

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Prologue funded the completion of GT4 I guess, or an extended/improved soundtrack.

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

Only time will tell, but it sure does look slim to none that microsoft will topple sony in this department. This whole arguement reminds me of when people were proclaiming that UT was going to detrone quake III.

Microsoft may need more than a toehold in entertainment.

Now that their holding company has been consolidating its resources, it looks like Sony's future (in-house) entertainment projects could be a Sony Pictures and Sony Music and Sony Computer Entertainment production ...

"I'm at Sony Pictures, so I can't really talk about SCEA's specific plans, but Sony as a whole is committed to convergence of entertainment through multiple platforms and will continue building out networked entertainment services for all forms of content to be enjoyed on future consoles (PS3 and beyond), PCs, mobile phones, and the PSP. Ultimately all of the major IP-connected platforms will be vehicles for online entertainment."
- Yair Landau, vice-chairman Sony Pictures Entertainment and president of Sony Pictures Digital

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

Pepto-Bismol do you actually believe what you are saying? That if a lot of money is spent on a game then it is not possible for it to be a sim?

That's not what I said actually.

Pouring a ton of money into software development does not preclude simulation -- it enhances it. Deeper pockets better facilitate (and allocate) resources.

So a larger investment is likely to result in a more accurate simulator, which is all fine and dandy, provided of course, that your chief aim is to showcase technology rather than realize a return ...

 

[cthellis42]

Actually, GT4 Prologue sold ~750k copies in Japan (746,967 to be exact ).

Sorry, I meant to qualify "by the end of 2003" since I didn't have the 2004 numbers at easy reference.