Yamauchi reveals GT5 details to Car & Driver
by Kyle Orland 
{ Jul 3rd 2007 at 11:55AM }
- Programming detailed car models on the PS3 is a ridiculously time-consuming process. "For Gran Turismo 1, one car was one day's work for one man," Yamauchi said. "For GT3, one car was one man's work for 30 days. For GT5, one car is one man's work for 180 days."
- Since programming 700 new cars for GT5 would take the Polyphony team five years, the game will launch with what the article calls a "a much smaller collection," with downloadable updates to follow. This seems to somewhat confirm earlier rumors of a focus on downloadable content for the GT series.
- Yamauchi said the PS3 is powerful enough to handle in-game car damage , but implementing it realistically would require "double the work" in physics and artistic modeling. So will it make it into the game? As the Magic 8-Ball might say, signs point to no.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Darcrequiem @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:05PM
Can they even call GT5 a simulation anymore. I mean DiRT and Forza 1/2 have car damage models. Yamauchi's excuses have become way past tired at this point.
thegreathoodoo @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:06PM
first post first post!!!
i like ice cream
RogueStorm @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:06PM
180 days!!! Those better be the most photorealistic, anti-aliased, not a single flat angle in a fender anywhere to be seen when zoomed in digital cars EVER!
konajinx @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:07PM
And Sony fans get to play that good old waiting game once again.
Code601 @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:08PM
Maybe if they did not insist on putting so many cars in thier they might actually finish the game. Who needs cars that are just useless for racing? Like the way the entire renault or ford range is included.
Ive always found grand turismo too hardcore for me, it needs more reasonable diffuctly levels for us folks that dont want to invest hours upon hours learning tracks.
Code601 @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:08PM
Maybe if they did not insist on putting so many cars in thier they might actually finish the game. Who needs cars that are just useless for racing? Like the way the entire renault or ford range is included.
Ive always found grand turismo too hardcore for me, it needs more reasonable diffuctly levels for us folks that dont want to invest hours upon hours learning tracks.
Kenny @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:12PM
Grand Turismo fans should definately check out Forza and DiRT on the xbox 360.
It has great graphics, car damage and tons of cars.
Best of all, it's available now and you don't need a $600 machine to play it.
Fernando Rocker @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:15PM
Sounds more like a ultra realistic car tech demo than a game.
Jonathan Tran @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:16PM
If one car takes one man 180 days...
Why not just have 18 guys finish each car in 10 days?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyXUVd2c83c
Andrew @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:17PM
This is the perfect place to bring up technical accuracy vs. fun debate. Would a digital car that took 180 days to program be any more fun to play with in a game than one that took far less? Are they so focused on technical improvement that they miss the fact that they're supposed to be making a game? To quote Jurassic Park: "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
ElTiante @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:22PM
I read the full article in C&D and the hubris of these guys is just breathtaking: “It will be done when it’s done, you don’t take a movie form Spielberg” (!??)
GT is a system seller and something the PS3 could definitely use. But these Polyphony Studio dopes don’t seem to feel any pressure to get the damn thing done. I’ll bet most PS3 owners (or PSP owners for that matter) would forgo 15 or so versions of the Nissan Skyline and get the game this fall
sheppy @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:21PM
Johnathan Tran,
As things move between people in this field, chances of things screwing up goes up exponentially. So usually one guy is tasked with something start to finish in the sim world. Of course, that's usually just the sim world.
Personally, never cared much for GT. Hated licenses and all that shit. Discovered I liked Forza 2 but mainly for that line.
GodisaMyth @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:23PM
Damage in Forza is a joke. I would rather not have damage at all if it ends up looking like Forza's damage.
Burnout's damage modeling is on a completely different level than Forza's.
In fact, I do not even consider Forza's pathetic attempt at damage acceptable on any level. The cars bend in preprogramed ways and look completely unrealistic and ridiculous in doing so.
GT5 will come out in 2008, Yamauchi is a perfectionist but I believe Sony will not let this game be delayed into 2009.
One car takes 1 man 180 days (man hours)...do you think that they are making the cars one man at a time? No, there are multiple people working on the same car...so the actual time it takes to make 1 car is much shorter if you have 6 or 12 people working on the same car.
Geez Joystiq....have you ever herd of man hours?
Bring on E3!!!
vidGuy @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:29PM
Or, you know, get 100+ designers each making a car. After 6 months, bam, you have 100 cars at full quality.
Of course, these comments come from a developer making games for Sony's console - so I'd cut everything in half, at least.
machrc @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:32PM
dont even compare burout damage to forza..
atleast MS trys to incorporate in game visual damage and bumpers falling apart and windows breaking..
I rather have damage in any form as long as its in the game unlike the old king..
give it up sony racers.. forza passed the gt series back on the xbox in the realistic fun department..
its too bad pgr3 didnt keep the car specific things like spoiler lifting on the c-gt and other little things it had on pgr2 but anywayz..
el tonot @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:36PM
Best of all, it's available now and you don't need a $600 machine to play it.
Why do people keep acting like 600 is alot of money......it really isn't. The only people I know who think that 600 is alot of money are students, old people who didn't save during their working years, low-income HS/College drop-outs, and last but not least people who let procreation control their lives.
horngreen @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:52PM
For those interested in video game production you might want to ask yourself.."Would I enjoy spending 8 hours a day for 180 days modeling a Mini Cooper?" NO damage yet again? Come on step up with the times!
Jonathan Tran @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:38PM
I agree it would be better if they cut development on each car 25%, and had 25% more cars
GJM @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:46PM
GodisaMyth, even trolls laugh at you.
Tony @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:49PM
"Why do people keep acting like 600 is alot of money......it really isn't. The only people I know who think that 600 is alot of money are students, old people who didn't save during their working years, low-income HS/College drop-outs, and last but not least people who let procreation control their lives."
So, almost anyone that probably plays games?
chilibean @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:52PM
@7
Gran Turismo fans don't like Forza because it's not nearly as good. I played one, it just wasn't nearly as good or fun as GT. I tried the demo of Forza 2 and found I would still rather play GT. I just enjoy the more realistic cars, physics, feel and sound. It's a much funner game, to me at least. Dirt, though, is a really good game. I have to think the only reason someone would prefer Forza over GT would be because they hate Playstation, understandable.
DBX00 @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:57PM
I really wish you guys would summarize articles better. The reasons for no car damage as stated in the article in car & driver was the man power AND certain car companies have not agreed to have their cars damage up to simulation standards. Hence, a Ferrari crash rating may not compare so well as a Porsche. The developers want to incorporate that level of detail into the car damage and hence some manufacturers think it may look bad. It also would be ridiculous to have it for some cars but not others. The car damage seen in other games is not up to simulation standards b/c they use a standard algorithm to emulate damage instead of having each specific car react differently to impacts.
Secondly, he also states that car damage could end up being implemented as downloadable content when it is "perfect". I'll go on to say that Gran Turismo is not for the average racing gamer but for people that take car seriously and enjoying modifying their machines. I really don't care if the car has a flashy paint job if every car drives the same and competition turns into who can push who off the road the best.
vidGuy @ Jul 3rd 2007 12:58PM
el tonot
$600 is or isn't a lot of money depending upon what you are buying. It's a little thing called value. Is a PC worth $600? Depends on what is in it and what you are going to be using it for. Is a gaming console worth $600? Depends. Most people don't think it is. If I was buying a miracle drug, I'd pay $600 for it. If I was buying a watch, I don't think I'd drop $600 when a cheap thing would do just as well. Unless you are trying to impress someone, why bother?
So, you may be getting a lot of value out of your $600 PS3, but a lot of us are finding more value with a Wii and/or 360 for the same price or less. Many of us don't see much value in a $600 BluRay player.
ricefarmer @ Jul 5th 2007 10:13AM
"Why do people keep acting like 600 is alot of money......it really isn't. The only people I know who think that 600 is alot of money are students, old people who didn't save during their working years, low-income HS/College drop-outs, and last but not least people who let procreation control their lives."
Shoot, I make almost 6 figures and $600 for a game system is a lot of money to me. The rest of the world who doesn't live in their parents basement have bills and 401ks to think about.
john @ Jul 9th 2007 10:07PM
you make 6 figures and you live with your parents... that gives you a lot of credibility... idiot. i don't care how long gt5 takes to come out as long as it does what every gt has done since 1996... raise the bar. you can say it's not realistic or whatever, but i find as a racer both in the real world and in the gt world that except for the lack of damage, gt has always been the best of the racing games that came out on the other consoles. and if the developers are taking 180 days to develop a car, that's probably man hours as someone else said. they probably have 6-8 men on each car, so figure about 2 weeks or so for each car. and i seriously think that GT5 will be out by the middle of next year cause sony's not gonna move very many ps3's without it. even nfs, gta, and madden can't move systems like a brand new gran turismo can. i think sony's going to sell enough ps3's to almost break even on it, poly will launch GT5 and the price on ps3's will drop quick; also think about if a new gt, gta, and nfs all came out in the span of about 2 weeks... sony would make a lot of money then... and all 3 have games slated for a 2008 release or somewhere thereabouts... i say sony put the games on hold till all 3 are done then launch all of them at once and spike the ps3 sales.
sheppy @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:01PM
Why are the comments in every thread a commercial nowadays.
"I like sandwiches!"
"Fuck you, sandwiches suck, you eat chips. Cause then you don't have to prepare your food. And the damage modeling on chips is much better than sandwiches...
RogueStorm @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:02PM
@21
You lose all credibility no matter what your point is when you use the word "funner". Besides, I've always heard that GT is more about realism and simulation than being "funner" than the competition, yet here you are telling me that a simulation is "funner" than a game designed to balance realism AND fun like Forza.
Myrpok @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:06PM
I HAVE RECEIVED INSIDE INFO THAT GT5 HAS BEEN CURRENTLY SHELVED
chilibean @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:07PM
@26
Yes, I enjoy a racing game that is about realism and simulation, for me and most other fans of GT, that is fun. Therefore a have more fun with a game like GT. How do I lose credibility, or did you just not feel like reading the rest of the comment?
DBX00 @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:09PM
vidGuy
It's fine is the perceived value doesn't exist for certain consumers at $600, but what gamers/fanboys seem to ignore is that not everyone is meant to purchase a console or any product at launch. The price will decline and potentially at some point the games/price will create sufficient value to warrant a purchase. It makes no sense to try and bash people that have found value in the PS3 on day one b/c you/others don't perceive the value to exist. It just seems like everyone wants to own all the consoles at for each generation, but the reality is that their aren't enough developers to create a substantial unique catalog for each console (hence the multiplatform craze). In my opinion, purchasing more than one console (wii/360) didn't make sense b/c I would have to buy accessories for all of them. I owned both those consoles at one point and time, but decided to consolidate my collection to the PS3 because it gave me the multimedia aspects and online gaming found on the 360 and new control mechanism found on the Wii. Most importantly, Sony has the largest software development arm which is evident in the number of titles coming out in the next three-five months. The PS3 guaranteed me that I wouldn't miss out on my old games and none of the important new ones. Let's be clear though; both the XBOX360 and Wii offer their own great experience, but I can't understand the justification to purchase that much hardware each generation. Maybe that's why so many people are angry.
RogueStorm @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:14PM
My point was more to your use of the word "funner" in relation to your insistence that GT is better than Forza. Again, you even state that GT is more of a simulation than a racing game. Imagine for a second that a NASA engineer used the word "funner" when talking about a simulator for the Shuttle. See where credibility kinds of drops off? All I'm saying is, lay off the word "funner" when you're trying to make a point about something being better than something else.
Also, check the BlueTooth connection between you and your sarcasm meter, I think they lost connectivity somewhere.
AirIntake @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:26PM
@GodisaMyth
MS (or any company for that matter) isn't allowed to have full damage modeling at the request of carmanufacturers. Using the car in a game, and destroying it accurately are two separate agreements that have to be made between the game maker and the auto maker. Burnout was able to have spectacular crashes because they didn't use real car licenses. You want more realistic damage in GT or Forza? Talk to the auto manufacturers.
One thing I have noticed though, is that auto manufacturers are more lenient with damage when they license their cars for rally games. Probably because rally is all about managing and limiting damage.
vidGuy @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:28PM
DBX00,
Thanks for the fair response. I agree with you that as the product drops in price it will look like a better value - thus the push from the entire industry to drop the damn price. Remember, though, that the competitors will likely drop their prices at the same time, so in relation to each other the value judgement will probably stay fairly even. True, it makes no sense to bash on perceived value - but I've constantly seen these "You can't aford $600!1! loser" posts and it's getting kinda silly.
It makes sense to just own one console to eliminate the accessory purchase, if you are content with what you are getting. I've gone the Wii/360 route because I don't think the PS3 even gets close to the Wii in the control experience, and I've always loved Nintendo's games. Then, the 360 gives me most of the features of a PS3, proven online, and probably about 95% of the same games, plus exclusives that I care about. Tit-for-tat, it's just a better way to go, IMO.
Anyway, I've spent less than a grand on my hardware, accessories, online, and Wii Points and I feel set for this generation. At $1000 on PS3 stuff, I'd feel like I was missing out still. If you don't feel that way, cool. Value is always subjective.
I wasn't trying to bash, just say that $600 buys different value for different consumers.
chilibean @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:29PM
Ah, I see your point, but I am not an automotive engineer, nor do I race for a profession. If I was playing a game based off a NASA simulator, and I was enjoying myself, I would probably say something like, wow, this is fun. This is more fun (thanks for the quotes, I am a jerk, did not even get the funner thing) than that other game over there.
Ian @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:39PM
chilibean:
Not true. I have a PS2, and GT3 and 4 and quite honestly... its FAR too time consuming. Forza is easy to do, but hard to master... but best of all, you don't HAVE to master it to actually succeed at it. I don't have to play for 8 hours a day for 2 weeks to finish 5% of the game like GT.
Polyphony takes WAY to long to release a game. Its not that they aren't great products, but they aren't exactly... full featured with the current generation. GT seems to be simply improving the graphics and physics without actually adding FEATURES. Damage, internet multi player, custom paint jobs, etc. I don't know what GT5 is 'supposed' to have but the excuses they make for not adding in things like damage are completely unacceptable. They can't get it licensed? Then how did Turn10 get the licenses with damage? They couldn't get Porsche, but Turn10 did, etc etc.
Forza may not be perfect, but its a better GAME than GT.
baby sea tuna @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:41PM
Dear Godisamyth,
Stop posting.
Thanks,
Everyone on this entire fucking site
romeo @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:42PM
@ el tonot
I'm willing to bet that if you asked the wealthiest man on the planet, he'd probably agree that 600 dollars is too much to spend on a video game console.
DBX00 @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:46PM
vidGuy
I hope Sony initiates the market price drop this fall because the market needs something to motivate developers and consumers this holiday season. I'll just add one prediction; Sony has several more ways to decrease the costs within the PS3 because several of the most expensive components are results of internal research and development (blu ray/cell). The one advantage that Sony has had with all its consoles is that they have significant more control over manufacturing costs and the supply chain. It's the reason they can afford to take massive losses on the console in the front and become profitable at the end of the consoles life. For example, Microsoft outsources the majority of its components and therefore the Microsoft's pricing on each component has a built in profit margin for the manufacturer such as Intel. Intel has the power to say this is the price and good luck finding someone else to do it cheaper without quality issues or a hault in manufacturing. They don't have the luxury like a Sony to take advantage of licensing out Blu Ray or Cell as a technology and economies of scale (cell utilized in computers, blu ray in movie players drop the manufacturing cost and lost inventory), while also eliminating the 5-10% markup from companies like Intel and etc. The price of the PS3 will decline, but my opinion is that it will see a significant decline compared to Microsoft. I don't see Nintendo dropping the price of their console for awhile.
DBX00 @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:51PM
To Everyone Else,
GT is a true simulation; that's the point. You don't learn how to become Jeff Gordon by jumping in a car and racing around a track a couple times. If you're not interested in a true simulation, then there are plenty (and I mean plenty) of other option out there.
machrc @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:53PM
Oh yeah GT pSp was mentioned in the article..
to think that was one of thee best reasons for me getting one..
I swear to g0d, I let my parking attendant borrow it with my snesx emulator with all the snes rom games..
I would still pick it up if it came out for the psp.
but as far as consoles.. more then 3 screens compatible..built around wheel...awesome..awesome detailing abilities that come sencond to none..almost a game in itself.. no freaking drivers license....relief..
jsn @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:57PM
All I see are a bunch of reasons why the game won't have what a game like this should have out of the box. Well, more excuses than reasons.
I mean c'mon, 180 days for one car? Maybe in the torture chamber that some of these japanese developers believe is required to make a good game. In the real world, where your tools make your job easier, that's just not reality.
It's just a matter of time before devs like this one whither and die because they, like Sony, simply don't understand the market they work in anymore.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Jul 3rd 2007 1:59PM
Forza is a crappy GAME.
Forza 1 was a better GAME than Forza 2. And GT is better because at least they have some challenge elements in it (licenses).
Neither is terribly good as a game. Take a look at TOCA 2, which is a better simulation than GT or Forza and a better game too, because they have a story mode with cut scenes from your manager and such.
It is inexplicable to me that neither GT nor Forza can manage to put even the least game elements in the game to appeal to a broader audience.
As a person currently at Level 50 in Forza 2, I can say car damage doesn't make or break a game. In fact, just try some of the high level races (any R car race in Pro or the R1 race in the regionals) and you have to restart multiple times to get a start clean enough that you can win. Other times, the computer muscles you and hurts your aero at the start, making it tough to win on high speed, high HP tracks.
It really sucks that in order to win a race, I need to gear my car wrong (too much 1st gear) so I can get ahead of the computer cars before the wrecks at the first corner. Watching the AI (which is otherwise much improved) nail the walls at the corners on the NYC track and blow their motors (behind me) is bizarre. It doesn't make sense and it doesn't add to the game.
180 man-days for a single car seems like a lie to me. I would think more like a man-week for a good job. Although perhaps it's issues like that that are the reason that Forza 2's "race bumper cap" (rear) just moves the exhaust pipe to a different (uniformly ugly) spot and virtually no cars in Forza 2 have any alternate downforce parts than these ugly defaults (the Audi S4 being an exception). I guess this is better than Forza 1 where even race cars (like the VIS MR2) had no adjustable downforce options.
I love the DiRT demo. I'm trying to hold out for the PS3 version, but I bet the moment the 360 version gets discounted, I buy it. I want to get the PS3 version because it should support good Logitech steering wheels. MS' awful 360 racing wheel is even more awful in DiRT. Don't even try it, and if you haven't bought the wheel, I'd recommend against it.
AirIntake @ Jul 3rd 2007 2:02PM
@DBX00
GT is nowhere near a true simulation. It compromises like every other game to make it more fun. Try F355 Challenge if you want to get kicked in the balls by a real simulation.
wild homes @ Jul 3rd 2007 2:09PM
I wonder if the Gran Turismo series is going to reward Sony from a production-to-profit perspective. it sure seems like Polyphony must be putting an assload of money into this thing. do they really believe that the PS3 market will make this venture profitable this time around? as the games have evolved they've just become more and more simulation-bound. this isn't the sort of game ten million people are going to buy this time. and let's not forget, if this thing comes out in 2008 the PS3 install base is unlikely to be more than twenty million at most, and right now even that looks like a real, real stretch. so who does Yamauchi think is going to pony up the money to make GT5 anything but a financial sinkhole? maybe the frequent (oh-so-frequent) allusions to DLC are a real telling thing. because this generation we all know DLC is so reasonably priced.
someone needs to tell him about the scenario where you don't spend more money than you can afford to lose. I think that would be prudent.
Plaid Ninja @ Jul 3rd 2007 2:12PM
When I want to know what it feels like to drive I'll get in my car.
BNinjaC @ Jul 3rd 2007 2:16PM
@ LS2/LS7, wait to see if they've fixed the v-sync for the PS3 version. If not then get a cheap 360 copy. Good game but v-sync tearing ruins it for me.
As for GT5, I'm really looking forward to seeing some solid details at E3. I'm lusting for it after the HD demo. I hated Forza 2, PGR3 was a far better game. In fact, I'm going to dig my copy out right now...
rfom @ Jul 3rd 2007 3:23PM
I just dont get it - why is damage modeling so critical in a simulation? You cant crash to cause real damage in your car - you probably wont do well in the game which is fair because in real life, you try NEVER to crash your car, because it means you lose money on repairs, get hurt or even die.
On the other hand, if you dont like a realistic racing game (I am one of them) then play Burnout or Motorstorm - dont complain about GT5 focusing on what it is meant to be!
And though Forza 2 may be a good game, its damage modeling is just tacked on - which agains defeats logic, its like buying a Ferrari with cheap interiors. If its a simulator, do it properly or dont do it at all.
jamesgee55 @ Jul 3rd 2007 4:34PM
@romeo
Yeah of course he would say 600 is way too much... BECAUSE BILLY DONT LIKE SONY.
if u have a brain u will understand
GodisaMyth @ Jul 3rd 2007 4:42PM
baby sea tuna,
Yes sir...right away sir.
Shut up Nuttchugger.
from: ME
Bring on E3!!!
Digi Smalls @ Jul 3rd 2007 5:08PM
hypocrites all of you. where all the PS3 fanboy chants of "lazy developers"?
because this is also from Sony, it's "ok" that they never released GT for PSP, or that they haven't included damage or online yet while their competition already has two gens with them already?
these are simply current gaming standards now. and you not even going to get them in 2008.... i swear, MADDEN is becoming more innovative than GT at this point.
rfom, your logic is feeble as always. 'tacked on' damage is worse than NO damage? even if your 'tacked on' assertion was true, it existing takes nothing AWAY from the game, it only ADDS to it. the fact that damage is even POSSIBLE keeps you from not wanting to scratch your ride.
how many times have you bounced off a car in Turismo to avoid a wall? that's a bumper car simulator, not a driving simulator.
the fact that damage in Forza can affect performance is special incentive to drive correctly, something completely missing from GT. imagine how it affects online play...shit, nevermind...
why do you guys keep making excuses for Sony? seriously, you should be talking to them, not us. we care about you even less than Sony does.
.