|
DonFerrari said:
It was BS because it was not optional. You ended up having to use the cars or at least race against them. They look better in GT6 and now they are finally gone forever. I'm happy with the visuals now.
I aint happy, but whatever.
Replays were full of close-ups. That screenshot is from the initial camera angles before a race. If you use one of the standard cars you'll see this camera before every single race.
I don't play replay, I race, so I couldn't care less on how the replay looks, even if they all improve the showing.
FM6 relased on the X1. The console sold way less than the predecessor so all franchises are being affected. Halo, Gears, all suffered. The terrible sales of X1 even managed to tank a promissing new IP (Titanfall). GT6 released on the same console as GT5, so it's comparable. Anyway, I still think its sales have more to do with the release windows than with the game itself. Also mind when comparing Forza sales that they release the game yearly, so you would have to sum up the numbers to compare with GT. Not that it will be ahead, but the difference is not so pathetically huge.
FM and FH are different games, so FM comes every 2 years. And considering X1 is over 30M, the userbase isn't at fault for the low sales. Go look for my thread talking about FM sales, it is shrinking and there are no excuses for it. Yet you put PD at a worse situation than GT.
Put together a whole gen. GT5P, GT5, GT6 sold about 23M. FM2, 3, 4 and FH1 about 10M if i'm not wrong, maybe 12M. That is half, the difference is astronomic, even more when considering that GT5 alone could outsell all forza on its gen, or that the prologue with the bad selling GT6 could as well.
Let's look at Forza's scores:
Forza 3 - 92
Forza 4 - 91
Forza 5 - 79
Forza 6 - 87
Forza 7 - 86
GT5 got an 84. Not that far from Forza's and quite good considering that Forza never included last gen cars. GT5 had more content but half of it was PS2 assets. Critics were quite clear: it would be better to not have it. GT6 is an 81, reasonable and even above FM6 that released the same year. It was a passable sequel with few new things and a lot of stuff lacking from GT5. Right now GTS is at 78. It's also not that far off even from current Forza games.
And you can see FM averaging a lot higher than GT5-6-GTS, but if you think the difference between the games is so big ok, I will accept even knowing as sim it isn't and that most of the critics doesn't even evaluate it right.
I'm not discussing his previous achievements. And neither should Sony. Sega died because the higher-ups were having stupid ideas and everyone was afraid of going against the guys that created Sonic, Nights, etc.
I simply want to know what's the problem. They are not independent, Sony pays the bill for the games and owns the studio. So if Sony wants to shake things up, they will. If it's lack of budget, Sony has to give them more money. If it's bad management, fire some people. SCEJ (former name, I know) manages that stuff, so it's their fault in both cases.
I think you didn't understand this. The models they created for the PS3 have dozens of millions of polygons. The Ps4 can't handle more than dozens or hundred thousands per car. The PS2 models were below what the PS3 could render. The PS3 models are beyond what the best PC today could do. You couldn't even tell they were reused. They probably did exactly that and are just saying that to avoid having people that don't understand a thing about rendering complaining.
The game is profitable, so Sony isn't paying any bills, they pay their own dividends and have to spare. The company list it's own number, it's a subsidiary, but it have more authonomy than any other Sony studio, and if you look at what ND and SM says Sony gives a lot of independence to even then.
But again yes, Sony can look and improve the management, but first they would need to do it on Sony Japan that suffers from much bigger problem, and all Sony 1st party titles take about 4 years to be dev.
They did just that but are using cars that aren't on GT6? They are wizards.
I don't believe they created the new models. They already had it. And they are probably up to standards of offline rendering used in CG films. Of course they are up to the standard, you should get more informed about how modeling form games works nowadays.
They just said they created it form scratch to avoid people complaining like they did with GT5. Now, they would be just complaining for no reason, because the models are not last-gen. They are actually next(x5)-gen. Just good old PR here.
Yes they are so up to standard.... for sure... FM and PC use similarly high poly count yet their cars doesn't look as realistic.
So you say they avoid saying they are recycling to avoid backlash, but suggest they just reused everything? Now also explain why if they are reusing, why only pick 1/4
I agree with you here that it is not GT7. They were just trying to make it look like it was not a prologue. It's more like a prologue on steroids that could end up being a great spin-off. If the FIA competitions become huge, then it will be a success,
Your impression that it's a prologue doesn't make it a reality, but ok, have as you wish.
You need logic, physics, collisions, etc. Sounds, a bunch of stuff. It's way more than the models, really. The best case scenario here is a distance alike GT5 Prologue and full GT5 release.
From GT5P to GT5 they had to make all the content that weren't on Prologue, while on this case the models are already there. It wouldn't be near the same effort.
|
