Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 1:29 AM
Mon Nov 9
19 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/05/09
11/05/09
hell they prolly already made a lot of it back with GT5 Prologue sales
11/05/09
11/05/09
And Avatar...is a movie...made by JAMES CAMERON.
Do you remember any other movies he made recently? Ya know, it was kind of like...huge...
Oh wait, did I hear somebody say 2 million dollars? Oh...oh...wait, 2 BILLION dollars?
Are you stupid? #granturismo5
11/05/09
MaWeiTao thinks 60 million is really steep but its hasn't even touched the budget of blizzard's games.
Dude look at the budget for Titanic. it's half the budget of AVATAR and the economy was fine then. Another factor for titanic's success was its release near valentines day. How many people do you think will watch AVATAR as a christmas movie? With the success of District 9 which had a 30 mil budget don't you think FOX is sweating nukes when they realize they dropped 400 million bones on the production of AVATAR? #granturismo5
11/05/09
And, by the way, Avatars budget is "above 200" million, not 400. So, let's say 250. Exaggerator man!
Also, even in times of economic decline or stagnation, movie sales have not followed suite. So there goes the economic argument, at least from a historically relevant perspective. And, yes, there are references to evidence this in the last couple of months.
This hasn't even started yet my man. Titanic was in fact released around Christmas, 1997. It is the highest grossing film of all time, directed and written by James Cameron. Its budget was 210 million (adjusting for a 5% inflation rate). Next, I can pretty much guarantee you that Cameron's production studio has significant capital invested in this movie, along with Fox. You cannot be James Cameron and not have a significant financial stake in your movie. Seriously. So, no, I don't think Fox is sweating bullets about the 175 million it put down for Avatar.
So now you're stupid again, for not checking your facts properly. So there. #granturismo5
11/06/09
11/06/09
Or how about IMDB: "Release Date:
19 December 1997 (USA)"
On the budget:
"With a budget of $230 million, 'Avatar', a digital 3-D science fiction feature film, is directed and written by James Cameron." - Merinews
[www.merinews.com]
"Time has added the following to its article: 'The original version of this story misstated the cost of the film Avatar as being in excess of $300 million. The correct figure is in excess of $200 million.' " - Filmthreat
[www.slashfilm.com]
I could further quote articles that have the budget reported as 230 million, but that would be redundant.
And, what I said was that Titanic was 210 million, not Avatar. I estimated Avatar's budget at 250 million. All recent reports estimate a budget of 230 million.
Also, I never disputed that James Cameron said Fox was nervous, but he is a director - directors historically have a conflictual relationship with distributors. Fox, being a for profit corporation, is ALWAYS nervous about investments, it's their damned job to be. In fact, it is their LEGAL OBLIGATION to be.
Also, Cameron pushed back the release date of the film to allow for the proliferation of IMAX screens into movie theaters, and is not bankrolling this process.
So, unless you can provide me with clear citations and examples disproving mine, and supporting your claims, then quit being a dickhead. #granturismo5
11/05/09
Why does it anger you that there exist both Forza and Gran Turismo? If you like one better than the other, play the one you like better. Or play both. Or play neither. Nobody fucking cares. #granturismo5
11/05/09
Same deal with multiplat games. Gotta make sure mine looks slightly better.
Geeze, why you gotta be such an ass? I'm just ignorantly defending my ludicrous positions. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
When it comes to consumer products, be fickle and be open to choice is what I'd say. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
I have no problem with GT5 taking so long because I know Yamauchi and his team haven't been slacking during that time. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
I would rather have a genre-defining game every 6 years than a bunch of wannabes every other year. #granturismo5
11/05/09
Couldn't have put it better myself. +1 #granturismo5
11/05/09
Very true. GT was the original real driving simulator on consoles and I have very fond memories of playing 1, 2 and 3 on playstation.
I am still firmly in the Forza 3 camp though. It's the unprecidented customisation that hooked me. Forza's online community is amazing, GT5 owners will be missing out on something very special there.
11/05/09
That would be fine if the games held up six years....but they dont. The competition is constantly competing and putting out great additions and features in the mean time. I wouldnt mind if it was every three years or so...but six? Because yes, the auto industry (and more importantly) video game industry advances much faster than the rate of their output .
Point is even if GT5 is better than Forza 3 (its not really the point, but Id say its probably a hair better in terms of looks...but Forza is the one Id rather play), we will not see GT6 till probably 2015 whereas Forza would be on 5 or 6. I would rather have these incremental, but noticeable, increments every two or three years #granturismo5
11/05/09
its not really the point, but Id say its probably a hair better in terms of looks
What you smoking?
we will not see GT6 till probably 2015 whereas Forza would be on 5 or 6.
Seriously! WTF are you smoking?! GT6 will use the same engine as GT5 so it won't be another 6 years until it's released, I thought that would have been obvious.
Also, the lineup of cars is very up to date, the cover car for the game isn't even out to buy yet.
GT games have always been epically long and always have massive replayability and a huge library. I'm sorry but without trying to bash Forza in any way when I say this but that series cannot compare to Gran Turismo and come out looking better...other than being released quickly, which some might consider a con. #granturismo5
11/05/09
Realistically, Polyphony suffers from the same problem 3D Realms and many other developers from the hey day have; they can't perform on a budget, either time or money wise, and have the attitude that they don't have to. The only difference between them and 3D Realms is that Polyphony has Sony backing them financially and that's not about to change anytime soon. Unless Sony realizes they need to kick some butts into motion. Think how many copies they'd need to sell to turn a profit on that amount of money (although conning people into buying Prologue probably helped). #granturismo5
11/05/09
ROFL. You know your stuff don't you? /sarcasm
11/05/09
11/05/09
The racing line, brand name upgrades, the in-depth tuning, the PC-level of sim physics, the auction house and store front, the online play (at least with FM2), the livery editor, etc. have raised the standard when it comes to console racing sims.
In comparison, the GT series hasn't been genre defining at all.
"Better graphics" doesn't redefine a genre.
The fact that you can foster a community of painters, tuners and racers...that's genre defining.
The fact that you can have physics that take into account track surface temperatures, tire pressure, tire gas temperatures, tire sidewall flex, etc. on a level that only PC sims can compare?
A game like GT: Prologue had the same development time as FM2...yet featured less of everything. Not only less cars and tracks, but a poor online implementation, poor tuning implementation, NO upgrading of vehicle components, no livery editor, no auction houses or car trading aspects, and a half assed single player mode.
What GT5 has to do is basically do everything that Forza 3 does.
Which effectively makes Forza 3 the genre-defining game. #granturismo5
11/05/09
Spoken like a person who doesn't play the genre... #granturismo5
11/05/09
Yet you act as if GT is some untouchable superior.
As far as I see it, the biggest thing GT has going for it right now is its name, and that explains why Forza's team is so willing to boast at the moment. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
graphics are a relative thing, some people find certain things more pleasing than others
and I refer you to how long it took from GT3 to GT4 as why GT5-6 will take forever #granturismo5
11/05/09
Also, while Forza is good and actually really good, it's far from perfect. The controls are just not that tight. Things feel floaty when they shouldn't. DAMAGE modeling is weak actually. They brag about it but did a crappy job. Why is it that when we rub fenders side by side very lightly both of my taillights explode like the fourth of July and my hood crumples up like cardboard. NOT REALISTIC.
Yamauchi could have done damage like that probably without a problem. He's a perfectionist though. Any part of a game he's going to highlight he wants to be as absolutely realistic as possible. This is why damage was never done. That and the fact that he wants it done based on the car. So where a ferrari would get destroyed in a 10 mph accident a taurus would keep on chuggin (but manufacturers don't want that and it would take a ton of time). I'll take GT over Forza anyday. And I'm still saying I think Forza is very good. #granturismo5
11/05/09
lolwut
GT - 1998
GT2 - 1999 [famous glitches in this one]
GT3 - 2001
GT4 - 2005
GT5 - maybe end of year 2010
if I wanted to be nerdy, Id point out this is some type of exponential or geometric growth
so yes, GT6 in 2015 is not some crazy comment
Im not even arguing which game was better. So god help me I regret mentioning that my PERSONAL preference is Forza [because I think its more fun god damn it]....all Im saying is if you think GT6 is coming out very soon after 5, you have no idea what its like to be a GT series fan who has to patiently wait while DP dicks around with what their competition has made great strides in #granturismo5
11/05/09
I do have every idea what it feels like to wait but that's what other games are for.
You're entitled to your opinion but I just think all the critics will be silenced when GT finally comes out. And I played GT at a conference in Vegas 2 months ago and it's gonna be well worth the wait. Lets just leave it at that. #granturismo5
11/06/09
the point was look at how long the sequels on PS2 took even though they said they made the engine of GT3 good for 4 #granturismo5
11/05/09
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
yawn.....stopped caring about this vaporware a long time ago. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
Id like to point to you GT3 to GT4
how many years was that? #granturismo5
11/05/09
Until they firm up some type of timeline for this game, 'flagship title' or not, I'll continue to assume the worst.
thanksandbye #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
If so, please share.
I'm sorry, but a title thats "in development" for this long.....well....something must be wrong. Its not like Polyphony Digital or Sony just started making games yesterday.
Why the delay in offering ANY concrete dates?
A half complete demo for $35 a year ago? c'mon, is that it? Why the delay?????? #granturismo5
11/05/09
it took them about four years to go from 3-5 even though it was on the same system and even though they supposedly wrote the a new PS2 engine that would quicken dev time
whats going to happen is they will not rewrite the whole engine, but most of it and will take about four or so years proven by history and their seemingly lackadaisical trackrecord at game making in terms of deadlines and such #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
@Zegridathes:
@mintycrys is HOT for Bayonetta:
Pun triple combo! XD #granturismo5
11/05/09
If you guys have a back-up plan, I suggest you put that in motion.
*Speeds out before people start fuming* #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
11/05/09
Actually, now I know that the previous images we saw actually were bullshots, because these are even bullier.
Double bullshots! Probably rendered on a PC! lol.
Seriously, though. If this works in the same way as it does in GT5 prologue, then it's the same model and the same textures on the environment. But the image has a lighting pass extra, and some added blur-effects. #granturismo5
11/05/09
GT5's photo mode just goes all-out, and pumps out insanely high-resolution images (8 megapixel, I believe) with lots of AA and lighting. #granturismo5
11/05/09
..I'm.. not really caring a whole lot for a discussion like this.
But you don't get more detail if you push on AA. #granturismo5
11/05/09
However, it's a known fact that the GT5 photo mode shots do get a nice swab of AA in addition to a huge bump in resolution, as well as post-processing effects like better lighting, blur, depth of field, etc.
I merely included AA into the list of things that photo mode adds to a normal engine-rendered shot because...well.... it does. I never attributed the increased detail solely to AA. The scene is rendered with in-game assets, though. #granturismo5
11/05/09
;) ..well - if it's done like in the prologue, then the difference between photo mode and in-game is the post-processing effects, AA filter and framerate. I.e., they ran the game down to 30 fps in the replay to have more multisampling and some direct rendering/shader effects (..the heat blur, some lighting bloom). But the models and resolution actually is the same (there's no further scaling going on in either mode, than what is already there from the beginning in 1080p.. the reduction in height. There's no loading between, just the switch in modes).
I think that was different on the first demo that turned up. But there's no visible up or down in quality when switching on the prologue. So I don't think there's really any reason to doubt they've actually pulled it off. I mean, they have, with strangely complex models in the prologue.
And you can tell it's a "real" model in the latest shots, if you see the screens in the actual resolution they were supplied - the extremely tight pixels you have on the scaled down 800x600 pic isn't really representative..
I mean, if they release some of the somewhat promised 8-20 Megapixel bullshots - then we're talking. Perhaps they'd be creating progressive filtering of some sort? But the pics we've seen so far have been 1080p shots... that you see have the same kind of "in-game" artefacts as you have in the prologue.. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
#10&11: Love the shadowing and landscaping there. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
I really hope there's some subtle hints of further car customization but I doubt it. Just colors and what looks like a custom model that'll probably be won from a race or thirty thousand credits more expensive than the base model. #granturismo5
11/05/09
I'd say the car list for GTPSP is a good indicator of what to expect. #granturismo5
11/05/09
11/05/09
10/22/09
Top Gear and GT4 subsequently influenced in me replacing the Lotus with a new Evo IX 4 years ago.
Even though it pales in comparison to GT5P, I still play GT4 occasionally (since I still haven't completed it). Some of the GT4 races are a lot harder than anything in GT5P though. #granturismo