Well of course awesome graphics is advanced tech.

But the thing is, why do you think they shouldn't push the consoles and the graphics to the max?

Haters gona hate.

But im gona enjoy every little bolt, every rain drop and sun reflection. 

If they need 2 more years to convert 800 standard cars to premium i will wait.

GT5>reality f**k yeah!!

Now back to the topic!

Did it make profit?

the fact is the GT franchise has made Sony and Polyphony billions so GT5 has earned it's right to a large budget even if there was no GT5-P, using GT5-P to test the build and basically pay for the games construction is a great way to leverage the series popularity into an income stream that not only allows them to put in all those extras ,(its not just about the graphics) without adding to Sonys bottom line same goes for there paid work with car manufacturer's.

Honestly, what do you have against good graphics?

I totally agree that good gameplay should come before graphics, but when a game series has already proven excellent game mechanics and gameplay, what's wrong with them pushing the limits in the graphical department?

You'd rather them not put any money into the game at all?  If it wasn't for graphics, we'd still all be playing NES.

I totally hate when people put words into my mouth.

What's wrong? They're spending an unnecessary amount of money on polishing everything to the last details. These details won't even be noticed in-game. So I ask, why? Why do we need to waste millions of dollars on such frivolous shit?

There is no 'We' in this discussion.  You don't have to waste a simple penny.  If there is a market for it, then so be it.  People buy Wii games with absolutely horrendous gameplay/graphics for no reason.  People support the Wii despite it having not nearly as many great titles as the 360/PS3.  

In a racing simulator having great graphics means almost everything.  How can you believe in a 'simulator' if it looks like Mario Kart?   The answer is you can't.  Every single, little detail that makes it closer to real-life makes it a better simulator, period.   There is a market for it.  People love cars, collecting cars, looking at cars, driving cars (virtually) that they will never have a chance to touch.  By addressing every single small detail in this game they make the experience as immersive and real as it can possibly be.    

As long as there is a market for it, how can you talk about how much $$ they wasted?    Is that any different than saying why do we even make 3D games nowadays?  They cost more money to make and are a lot more in depth but it's just a waste.  What happened to the good old days of Battletoads and Mario and Sonic and Earthworm Jim.   Seriously, why does Nintendo Wii make 3d games?  Why not go exclusively 2d games.  That's so stupid for them to push motion controls on a 3d system.  Motion controls on a 2D system is where it's at. 

They already confirmed they earned back what was spent to make GT5 already thanks to Prologue did they not?...soooo yeah

`My response was in regards to the OP asking whether the sales from the Gran Turismo 5 demo covered the development costs of Gran Turismo 5.

If you look at the sales from the demo, then yes the sales covered the demo cost, but not the total development cost of Gran Turismo 5.

5 million shipped copies of GT5p is amazing.

GT5 should easily sell 10 million.

I hope it don't drop in price as soon as games usually do. They should keep it at full price for at least one year.

Will there be many Volvos and Saabs in GT5 btw?

It means GT5 is going to be the 'full' game to that 'demo'.

It's going to be... Ah, forget it.