GT5 Slipping to late fall?


Recommended Posts

Timing to be decided but "before Christmas".

A Sony Computer Entertainment Europe executive has said that he expects Gran Turismo 5 to come out "this fall, before Christmas", while confessing the release date is "not yet decided".

The comments come from James Armstrong, boss of SCEE's Portuguese arm, in an interview with Spanish site Canarias Al Dia. They were spotted by GT Planet.

It was Armstrong who originally suggested that GT5 would be out in late 2009, a position held by Sony right up until a March 2010 Japanese release date was announced at last year's Tokyo Game Show. A summer Western release was mooted before the Japanese launch was delayed.

I bought my PS3 for GT5 specifically.....2 years ago. I suspect 2011 is possible as well whistle.gif

Link

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/871780-gt5-slipping-to-late-fall/
Share on other sites

With Kaz saying the game was 90% complete, I'll await a response from him or SCEJ, not some Portuguese Sony rep.

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2010/02/05/sonys-q3-09-conference-calls/

We are all getting fed up waiting for the ever-slipping GT5 and Sony are feeling the financial pain of Kaz?s failure to reach a point where he is satisfied with the game. They were asked about how their Q4 software forecast met with internal targets they had previously set. The answer went like this
In fourth quarter we are seeing an underachievement of the target by ?20b. One reason is the delay in the launch of Gran Turismo [5]. We were originally scheduled to launch Gran Turismo [5] this year but it looks more likely that it will be after 2010 so that?ll be a significant factor.

Wonder if Kaz was listening in to the call. Yes, they did say ?after 2010″. Whether that was a slight mistranslation by the translator and Sony simply meant in 2010 or after the start of 2010 I have no idea. I listened to that part of the call several times to try and determine which was meant and it was not clear. If, and it is a big if, Sony really did mean ?after 2010″ then given the context that would mean after their 2010 financial year which ends in March 2011. A delay that long does not bear thinking about for us race fans or Sony.

Nah it'll be this year, but I'm thinking they're now going to pit it up against Halo Reach.

The Academy finals took place recently, I'll try find the videos, GUI changes and it now tells you when someone has overlapped you, I'll get the videos just now.

Here’s some great footage of the Nurburgring Nordschleife in the GT5 demo used to host the second round of the GT Academy 2010 competition. This race took place amongst the Portuguese finalists, and it’s a treat to watch. To compare it with the real thing, forum user CoolColJ matched the above clip with the following on-board lap from one of BMW’s Ring Taxis. Watch them both simultaneously to how GT5’s ‘ring compares…

Most likely it's just an online feature.

The would never "pit it up" against Halo Reach on purpose. Totally different gaming systems and totally different market. The only people it would affect are the hardcore mutliconsole owners that are strapped for funds (which would be a trivial amount) trying to decide which one to purchase.

GT5 will sell like gangbusters with or without Halo Reach. Halo Reach will sell like gangbusters with our without GT5.

this is getting stupid ... i can almost see it that when it comes out people will buy other things and gt5 will be a flop (only praises on graphics and no physics at all) ... slight damage to cars kind of pathetic ... people want a slight realism than cosmetic damage ... then again i guess they redefine sim as in handling and not so much physics

this is getting stupid ... i can almost see it that when it comes out people will buy other things and gt5 will be a flop (only praises on graphics and no physics at all) ... slight damage to cars kind of pathetic ... people want a slight realism than cosmetic damage ... then again i guess they redefine sim as in handling and not so much physics

It's fully mechanical damage to all cars, cosmetic damage to all cars, and the WRC and Nascar cars have interior damage and parts can fall off, how is that pathetic?

Probably taken lots of Forza notes and trying to beat it.

With the amount of features Forza is missing in comparison to GT5 it's probably the other way about.

With the amount of features Forza is missing in comparison to GT5 it's probably the other way about.

I have never played GT5 release (obviously), but going by GT5p, GT5 Academy and GT4 and older, Forza 3 has a substantial number more features than the GT series.

I have never played GT5 release (obviously), but going by GT5p, GT5 Academy and GT4 and older, Forza 3 has a substantial number more features than the GT series.

I'm talking about GT5 and what we know is in it, why would I be comparing old releases to Forza 3?

I'm talking about GT5 and what we know is in it, why would I be comparing old releases to Forza 3?

I guess I misinterpreted. But even using what we know of GT5, I still don't see the list as been longer yet (though it could be). Different, yes. More, I am not seeing it yet.

I just want GT5 to release, that way I can buy a racing wheel for my PS3 finally.

I guess I misinterpreted. But even using what we know of GT5, I still don't see the list as been longer yet (though it could be). Different, yes. More, I am not seeing it yet.

I just want GT5 to release, that way I can buy a racing wheel for my PS3 finally.

Better graphics, more cars (not just cars, on the track as well, up to 16), more tracks (one of them being the Top Gear Test track), head tracking, more robust online, 8mp photomode, weather, day/night cycles, official Nascar and WRC licenses to name some.

More cars, more tracks, head tracking, more robust online, 8mp photomode, weather, day/night cycles, official Nascar and WRC licenses to name some.

More cars, no doubt (as is every version of GT as they carry them over from previous versions and add more...they are on the 5th version so I would hope so). More tracks, not from what I have seen announced.

As for better graphics, yes, we are getting better looking car models in GT5.

Online doesn't look more robust at all. Photomode (and youtube mode) on GT5 looks to spank Forza's photo mode/video mode. We already had WRC in GT, just not the actual licensed name. NASCAR is going to be cool (though Forza added the 3 NASCAR brands to their game this year as well).

Head tracking would be way awesome, and I hope it works as intended. It's something I would totally use.

Some nice added features no doubt, but doesn't mean it exceeds by any means. Forza sports the largest amount of parts and tuning options/features on any console game to date (nothing to which we have seen in GT5 details yet). The much improved physics features down to tire deformation. The auction house for sharing and selling tuning setups, cars, paintjobs, logos, decals, screenshots, videos are a slew of features yet to be announced completely on GT5. The livery editor in FM3 is also untouched and nothing to that degree has been announced for GT5. While GT5 is giving us NASCAR this time around (though we can't have 43 cars on the field), Forza continues to give us Porsche since they have that license.

Granted, I love my RUFs w00t.gif

Both games are going to be comparable, no doubt.

More cars, no doubt (as is every version of GT as they carry them over from previous versions and add more...they are on the 5th version so I would hope so). More tracks, not from what I have seen announced.

As for better graphics, yes, we are getting better looking car models in GT5.

Online doesn't look more robust at all. Photomode (and youtube mode) on GT5 looks to spank Forza's photo mode/video mode. We already had WRC in GT, just not the actual licensed name. NASCAR is going to be cool (though Forza added the 3 NASCAR brands to their game this year as well).

Head tracking would be way awesome, and I hope it works as intended. It's something I would totally use.

Some nice added features no doubt, but doesn't mean it exceeds by any means. Forza sports the largest amount of parts and tuning options/features on any console game to date (nothing to which we have seen in GT5 details yet). The much improved physics features down to tire deformation. The auction house for sharing and selling tuning setups, cars, paintjobs, logos, decals, screenshots, videos are a slew of features yet to be announced completely on GT5. The livery editor in FM3 is also untouched and nothing to that degree has been announced for GT5. While GT5 is giving us NASCAR this time around (though we can't have 43 cars on the field), Forza continues to give us Porsche since they have that license.

Granted, I love my RUFs w00t.gif

Both games are going to be comparable, no doubt.

GT5 also has replaceable engine parts/car parts, and outer parts such as skirtings and spoilers. Oh they'll compete if your a one console only owner, but in terms of sales GT5 will destroy Forza 3.

There's 70 tracks in GT5 from 20 different locations.

GT5 also has replaceable engine parts/car parts , and outer parts such as skirtings and spoilers.

But nothing has been announced as how in depth it is or how many items.

but in terms of sales GT5 will destroy Forza 3.

As it should. GT is a household name with 55 million units out there. I can't imagine anyone thinking different.

There's 70 tracks in GT5 from 20 different locations.

134 tracks in 24 locations in Forza 3.

134 tracks in 24 locations in Forza 3.

That's mirrors/variations included, Forza 3 does not include 70 unique tracks, goodness knows how many mirrored/variations versions there are of the 70 tracks in GT5.

But nothing has been announced as how in depth it is or how many items.

It has but I need to go hunt down the link/interview now...

That's mirrors/variations included, Forza 3 does not include 70 unique tracks, goodness knows how many mirrored/variations versions there are of the 70 tracks in GT5.

Yup, they both have and had tons or mirrored/variations. That is how they market it.

It has but I need to go hunt down the link/interview now...

I would be surprised if you found one. We have been looking and waiting for the list at GTplanet for ages now.

Yup, they both have and had tons or mirrored/variations. That is how they market it.

I would be surprised if you found one. We have been looking and waiting for the list at GTplanet for ages now.

No, GT5 has been marketed as 70 unique tracks.

There was an interview or something discussing a shop to buy parts for your cars, possibly change engines between providers, tune and for some cars add things like skirtings and spoilers.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!