Yes the 8 GTs (coming Prologue) I played I wouldn't give below than 10, because that is my personal evaluation. And there is quite a big room of maneuvering between 8 and 10 isn't there?

I have played the GTS beta and on it I could recognize all that I needed and that granted the 10 (played over 10h) on its premisse. It's far from being my favourite or having all I want, but it is even farther from being a bad game that should get lower than 8. Judging the game for what it have it is over 8 without any question and reviewers looking for what the game is and what is important on the game have done good reviews.

I am saying just because there are low scores do not mean they are from fans of another series.  I am saying those type of scores probably make up 1% of those low scores.

The games you listed, Splattoon, COD and Titanfall, did not have the years like GT outside of COD and COD always has a SP component so not sure why they are included in your list.  I believe Splattoon has a SP now doesn't it and so does Titanfall 2.

The first thing is easy. Any car that was on GT6 is reused. Just new ones are new models. I'm not saying they couldn't recreate the models in this time, I'm saying that there wouldn't be any advantage in doing so. They would just be doing again a task that was already done and the quality of the models wouldn't improve the slightest. The ones they created for GT5 and GT6 are still way better than what any GPU can render in realtime. Once again, I am not talking about the level of quality you saw on the GT5/6 games. Those are brutally downgraded versions of the models that were created.

I really have the impression you are so uniformed about 3D modeling and rendering that you simply can't get a grasp of what I'm talking about. Please, elaborate on WHY they wouldn't reuse the models. I'm not talking about the models you saw in-game on GT6, I'm talking about the original models created by the artists that are orders of magnitude more refined. Just one single reason why you think they would recreate 3D models they already have.

If the GTS models are not up to the resolution, it's not because the models are on their limit. The hardware used to render it on realtime is. Neither you or I have seen the original models. The level of quality of modern models is almost like a CGI film (offline rendering).

Realtime rendering means (forgetting the CPU stuff) that a GPU has to render the car plus everything on the screen in less than 16ms for a 60fps game. Offline rendering means that a huge cluster full of GPUs can take almost as long as necessary to render it. It can take like a day to render 10 frames. That's why both are so different. If you look at Toy Story (the 1994 film), it still is ahead of a PS4 game in a few areas. Let's say the models created to be used on GT6 are, in their original forms, like Toy Story 2.5 or 3 quality.

About the time per car, you have to separate 2 stuff. A 3D artist creates a model of the car (or they use some kind of capture to import data to start it). It's a bunch of polygons and maps that he will adjust using a 3D modeling software (3DS, Blender and Maya are examples of these applications). This represents the visual part or the car. Physics, logic, etc, it has to be created by a developer on the engine (or it will use some library that does it). Sound is created by another guy.

This means that just because you already have the model, it doesn't translate to have everything complete. But you have to reuse it. But. most likely, the rest had to be created from scratch and it also takes some time.

You said anything less than a 9 is silly. And this is before the game was even out. That a score of 8 is silly. You clearly have more of an agenda/bias for the franchise than any of these reviewers could possibly have. I mean, am I taking crazy pills? Anything less than a 9, for a game you hadn't even played yet outside of a trial, is silly? Come on now.

People are different. The lack of a single player component might not bother you much or maybe it does bother you a lot but the online makes up for it, but that's not the case for everyone. Why even have reviews if they all have to agree that every game mechanic should be rated the same way, lol.

So now you aren't that certain that they reutilized right? And still waiting for the list anyway.

I'm not talking about they can't use, I agree that the models of GT5 and 6 could be. I'm saying that from interviews I saw they recreated because they thought they weren't precise enough (not that they didn't had enough polygons).

I sincerely don't think the level of graphics on Toy Story is above what PS4 can do, but it still is pretty to this day, and also we can't deny that single directed position of camera and offtime rendering helps a lot. One of the reasons I loved the CGI of the FFs.

About physics and the rest you know that Kaz said if the physics is complicated you are doing it wrong right? I really don't think that besides the sound capture the rest would take much effort from PD, it would mostly be tweaking and updating of the cars on GT5-6. If they decide to make GT7 probably those will be sucked in very fast.

Yes to me anything below 9 is silly, have silly and trolling become the same thing? Have you played the demo and the full release? How different they are? So is 10h of analysis of the demo much less representative than the regular time reviewers put?

The lack of SP (50-100h) should take out the score of an online only game? So should TF get cut to 60 or less?

What are you talking about here, mate? Of course they didn't reused models for cars that were not in the previous games, because they didn't had them.

They didn't recreated the 3D models. At best, they adjusted slightly one or another, instead of throwing away years of work. They would have to be stupid otherwise. If they were worried about the precision of the simulation, this has not to do with the 3D models here.

Even the OG Toy Story does stuff that it's still not possible on realtime rendering and it's a 20 years old movie. The camera position really doesn't change much (pixel shaders are the most demanding part, that's why changing resolution has a almost 1:1 effect in performance). Offline rendering, of couse, helps a lot. Basically, you can afford to render at 0.0001 fps instead of 60 fps.

I kind of agree with Kaz point here. A lot of the physics on the game are Newton's. Things like aerodynamics are more complicated because to be precise you need to simulate a fluid. Anyway, GTS probably just add more calculations that were not affordable on the PS3.

And yes, they can really do GT7 fast. Two years is a decent timeframe to expect it, that's quite fast for AAA standards. Next year only if they were already working on it (which is always possible).

And to me the idea that someone could say any score below a 9 is not valid, before a game is even out, is silly. Whether you think there isn't much difference between the trial and full game is irrelevant, because you know, opinions and all. Your opinion of Gran "never gonna score one below a 10" Turismo is pretty flawed, it doesn't make the scores that reviewers give it flawed.

Titanfall scored somewhere in the 80's even without a SP campaign, and that was with reviewers shredding it for no SP and a lack of content. Luckily for them, the content that was there, was worth that score. In the case of GTS, seems the content that is there is only worth a 77 or whatever currently. lol @ 60 or less. Is GTS at 60 or less? Also, does Titanfall have a history dating back TWENTY years of fully fledged releases loaded with content? Come on now.

You may think they were idiot for redoing the models, but you can't prove they did. Also you haven't come out and put how much of the cars are recycled or new.

Really? just give me a good reason why they wouldn't reuse the models. If you want to know how much are reused, just look all cars on the game and compare with the models on GT6. If they don't have diferences in their general shape, it's most likely the same. Are you expecting me to do that, like analyse hundreds of cars?

So camera position doesn't have any difference? Are you crazy? So is all that isn't seem on Toy Story universe also modeled and rendered?

Everything on a 3D enviroment had to be modelled. But what is rendered in a frame is just what is shown on the camera right now. The rest is removed during the culling stage before being rasterized.

The aerodynamics although complex can be simulated on computer quite easily and have the important parts as anchors for those equations and speed/angle atributes.

You can do a rough approximation of aerodynamics with equations that are somewhat close to reality. But if intended to do something more realistic, you could simulate fluids. That's not exactly trivial, that's why I'm saying that calling simplistic physics as ideal is a bit of a stretch. It depends a lot on what you are trying to do.

GT7 would normally take 2 years sure... but my point is that if they were only to import the premium models, put the new sound and adjust physics for the cars, bring the PS3 new tracks (wouldn't bring GT4 level tracks) and repeat the career they could do in even 6 months. The content is almost all created, it would be just a mater of "translation" and testing.

A game normally goes gold around 2 months before launch. That means it is already 95% complete. So that means they would have to complete the game in 4 months. Now subtract QA from that. You're being ridiculously optimistic about the complexity of these tasks.

It's not hard to see AAA games delayed for 6 months because they still had to polish stuff. It's absurd to assume that this kind of timeframe can be used to develop a full game even if a lot of stuff is already done.

The only case where you see such insane development times is with yearly games. But titles like AC and Fifa have a ridiculous amount of people working at once. If you look at AC's credits, they have like 4 studios working on it and close to 1000 people. Polyphony is too small for such feat. They could do it in a year if Sony let them use 2 or 3 smaller studios to offload the work.