If it's as good as GT2 was, It will make me buy a PS3. The two PS2 sequels disappointed me with the lack of tracks and cars comparatively. It was a game that took me the better part of 5 years to finish career mode, and I got more value out of that game than any other title not named Civ 3.

UNC_Samurai: If it's as good as GT2 was

Another GT2 fan? Really?! Oh happy day!

I swear I'm the only guy who loves GT2.

I could be persuaded to get a PS3 for this. You're exactly right that Gran Turismo packs an unbelievable amount of game play into a single title.

/goin on 6 years and I'm still not done GT3

...if the damn game ever comes out. I have it reserved, but hate having to wait till the middle of next year for it.

It better be worth the wait, although I have a feeling I will be disappointed by the number of tracks. I imagine they could make tracks available to purchase over the PSN, but they could also make them outrageously expensive.

I want.

Kellner21: ...if the damn game ever comes out. I have it reserved, but hate having to wait till the middle of next year for it.


I decided to go ahead and get Forza 3 for my 360.

Driving the Le Mans track was too much fun.

I bought a PS3 for this game and this game only. I pre-ordered this game 2 months ago.

145 days.

I still remember spending hours figuring out the ideal toe-in and camber angles for cars in GT2. Oh, suspension upgrade.

no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

colinspooky: no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

Except GT5 is confirmed to have vehicle damage. Fail.

Still no cure for people who think gaming is getting 100% completion even if every game that you play is the exact same.

colinspooky: no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

Forza is to GT as RC Cola is to Coke.

LavenderWolf: Still no cure for people who think gaming is getting 100% completion even if every game that you play is the exact same.

I, too, think I should dictate how everyone enjoys their videogames.

Is this one of those games where you drive around a track, and then adjust things slightly so you can go slightly faster around the track?

rmz: colinspooky: no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

Except GT5 is confirmed to have vehicle damage. Fail.

They say the cars will take damage, but I've watched that video of someone smacking around a ferrari at 100 mph or more around some track and the car barely suffers more than scratches to the paint. Nothing seems to crumple, or break, or anything. I've played N64 games that showed more vehicle damage.

as long as 5 doesn't fark my PS3 like 4 did my PS2 (twice) I'll be happy.

FuzzyLynx: LavenderWolf: Still no cure for people who think gaming is getting 100% completion even if every game that you play is the exact same.

I, too, think I should dictate how everyone enjoys their videogames.

Meh. I didn't tell anyone what to do.

OH NOES THE BIG SCARY FARK MAN TELLS ME WHAT TO DO!

GTA IV was reportedly $100 million, and Microsoft threw Rockstar Games another $50 million for the two 360-exclusive Episodes (together adding about 2/3 the length of the original game) on top of that. Other than licensed music the money's all on the screen.

I'm spoiled. I want every game to have an incredibly large and detailed sandbox environment running all kinds of simulated behaviors inside it. And GT5, apparently they're still not sure if they're going to put weather in it. Really? Come on, Rockstar puts every other studio to shame.

Nem Wan: GTA IV was reportedly $100 million, and Microsoft threw Rockstar Games another $50 million for the two 360-exclusive Episodes (together adding about 2/3 the length of the original game) on top of that. Other than licensed music the money's all on the screen.

I'm spoiled. I want every game to have an incredibly large and detailed sandbox environment running all kinds of simulated behaviors inside it. And GT5, apparently they're still not sure if they're going to put weather in it. Really? Come on, Rockstar puts every other studio to shame.

Rockstar have become the laziest, most over-rated developer working today. GTA IV offered next to no new innovations of the genre, had a terrible aiming system, unforgiving repetitive missions, stereotypical characters and cliched dialogue around every corner, controlled like a sluggish beast, and offered hardly anything to do in the way of side-missions. But every time they release a game everyone eats the shiat up and gives it a perfect 10/10 score, so they don't think they need to improve upon anything in their increasingly stale games. The game did have impressive graphics however.

Passive Aggressive Larry: Nem Wan: GTA IV was reportedly $100 million, and Microsoft threw Rockstar Games another $50 million for the two 360-exclusive Episodes (together adding about 2/3 the length of the original game) on top of that. Other than licensed music the money's all on the screen.

I'm spoiled. I want every game to have an incredibly large and detailed sandbox environment running all kinds of simulated behaviors inside it. And GT5, apparently they're still not sure if they're going to put weather in it. Really? Come on, Rockstar puts every other studio to shame.

Rockstar have become the laziest, most over-rated developer working today. GTA IV offered next to no new innovations of the genre, had a terrible aiming system, unforgiving repetitive missions, stereotypical characters and cliched dialogue around every corner, controlled like a sluggish beast, and offered hardly anything to do in the way of side-missions. But every time they release a game everyone eats the shiat up and gives it a perfect 10/10 score, so they don't think they need to improve upon anything in their increasingly stale games. The game did have impressive graphics however.

Well that's just like, your opinion, man. Don't present it as fact.

Passive Aggressive Larry: Rockstar have become the laziest, most over-rated developer working today. GTA IV offered next to no new innovations of the genre, had a terrible aiming system, unforgiving repetitive missions, stereotypical characters and cliched dialogue around every corner, controlled like a sluggish beast, and offered hardly anything to do in the way of side-missions. But every time they release a game everyone eats the shiat up and gives it a perfect 10/10 score, so they don't think they need to improve upon anything in their increasingly stale games. The game did have impressive graphics however.

GTA:IV was far from terrible, but I agree with this comment, for the most part. I actually just sold my copy a couple of days ago. If it's never played... what's the point? I just got tired of it and never turned it back on.

That said, I WISH WISH WISH I could justify a PS3 just for GT5. I love my 360, though, and I can't buy another system just for one game (though I also miss the Hot Shots Golf franchise).

Gran Turismo 5 creator Kazunori Yamauchi on the game costing $60 million to make: "considering the size and scale of the game, I think it's probably a fairly small amount."


Prologue is a LOT of fun. I just might have to get the full version when it's released.

UNC_Samurai: If it's as good as GT2 was, It will make me buy a PS3. The two PS2 sequels disappointed me with the lack of tracks and cars comparatively.

-GT2 was a great game, and then they mucked it all up with GT3. The car selection in GT3 was piss poor, and I swear that the non-Japanese cars were underrated in HP. If GT5 turns out to meet the hype, I'd shell out for a PS3 just for the chance to take some supercars around Top Gear track.

Accolade: Passive Aggressive Larry: Rockstar have become the laziest, most over-rated developer working today. GTA IV offered next to no new innovations of the genre, had a terrible aiming system, unforgiving repetitive missions, stereotypical characters and cliched dialogue around every corner, controlled like a sluggish beast, and offered hardly anything to do in the way of side-missions. But every time they release a game everyone eats the shiat up and gives it a perfect 10/10 score, so they don't think they need to improve upon anything in their increasingly stale games. The game did have impressive graphics however.

GTA:IV was far from terrible, but I agree with this comment, for the most part. I actually just sold my copy a couple of days ago. If it's never played... what's the point? I just got tired of it and never turned it back on.


Oh yeah, it was far from terrible, I'm just saying it's over-rated as fark, like Rockstar is.

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: colinspooky: no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

Forza is to GT as RC Cola is to Coke.

You can't really evaluate a game until it has actually come out without coming off as extremely biased. Howbout we wait until they are both out then we can compare them side by side and see how they do compared to each other.

Blues_X: I decided to go ahead and get Forza 3 for my 360.

Is that any good?

Also a GT2 fan. Also pondering buying a PS3 if GT5 is as good as GT2

This is just what we need. I can't wait for more developers to be swallowed up by Activision/EA/Sony/MS.

Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

I started amassing accessories for PS3 now 2 years ago in anticipation of GT5. I have an extra controller and remote. I started saving Best Buy gift cards to be able to pick it up the moment GT5 came out.

Long story short, no more Best Buy gift cards and hundreds of hours logged on Forza 2. I am still thinking about GT5, but after 2 years of waiting, I question how much better than Forza it will/can be.

MrSpeed: Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

Wipeout XL for PSX does. Best racing game ever.

MrSpeed: Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

San Francisco Rush on the arcade does!

GreySpectre: SacriliciousBeerSwiller: colinspooky: no damage - same old tracks - what's new again?

Forza 3 has me at the moment. You can break the cars which makes you drive them properly.

Forza is to GT as RC Cola is to Coke.

You can't really evaluate a game until it has actually come out without coming off as extremely biased. Howbout we wait until they are both out then we can compare them side by side and see how they do compared to each other.

But by the time GT5 comes out we may be on Forza 4.

too bad this game is more fun to look at than actually play....
cruisin' usa kicked ass

bostonowns: too bad this game is more fun to look at than actually play....
cruisin' usa kicked ass

cockpunch/10

I just want another wrestling game with the AKI engine.

Virtual Pro Wrestling FTW!

/def jam & muscle don't count

That article seemed a little light on details. I haven't heard about GT5. Why is it big? Why does $60 million mean anything?

bhcompy: MrSpeed: Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

Wipeout XL 3 for PSX does. Best racing game ever.

FTFY, but XL comes in second. Wipeout 3 on the hardest mode ruined me for all other racing games. Gran Turismo is bullshiat.

As an International A Class License holder in GT1 and GT2, I wish I could get GT5... but... I'm not buying a PS3 to get it.

this looks like big fun

OnmyojiOmn: bhcompy: MrSpeed: Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

Wipeout XL 3 for PSX does. Best racing game ever.

FTFY, but XL comes in second. Wipeout 3 on the hardest mode ruined me for all other racing games. Gran Turismo is bullshiat.

I was pleased with Wipeout HD. Combined with the Fury expansion, it's pretty awesome.

Passive Aggressive Larry: Rockstar have become the laziest, most over-rated developer working today. GTA IV offered next to no new innovations of the genre, had a terrible aiming system, unforgiving repetitive missions, stereotypical characters and cliched dialogue around every corner, controlled like a sluggish beast, and offered hardly anything to do in the way of side-missions. But every time they release a game everyone eats the shiat up and gives it a perfect 10/10 score, so they don't think they need to improve upon anything in their increasingly stale games. The game did have impressive graphics however.

GTA IV is certainly not a bad game. It's just so boring. It's weird to say this. GTA IV has better production value but San Adreas is just more fun. Never bother to finish GTA IV, really really bored with the missions. To me, GTA IV is a downgrade of San Andreas in every possible way but the graphics.

Interesting dev costs:

60 million for a video game, people buy at 60 bucks a pop
60 million for a movie, people will pay once(theaters) at 10 bucks a pop, 25 maybe after for DVD

Masso: GTA IV is certainly not a bad game. It's just so boring...

Gotta agree on this one. I played San Andreas through 3 times, while GTA IV got to the end once. I am disappointed that RockStar decided to limit RPG's to 4 (or 5) which make running amok useless. I never did get a real 6 star wanted level (not counting jumping islands too soon)

MrSpeed: Nothing beats San Francisco Rush for N64. Nothing.

Wow, I didn't know there were still some die-hard Rush fans out there. I'm a Rush 2 man myself, though.

/It's dangerous! ahhhhhhhhhhhh

When GT5 comes out in 2014, I'm sure it will be cool. Until then, I'll keep enjoying Forza3, 4, 5, 6......

You know what's better than another announcement about possible release dates for GT5? Actually playing a game.

I'm intrigued with how well GT5 will present nascar now that EA is no longer producing a nascar game. I wonder how nascar ovals will feel with the GT engine

Can they please just release the damn thing already?

Erom

I wonder how nascar ovals will feel with the GT engine


I imagine they'll have a fair amount of turning left with some straight bits thrown in.

Is it any fun, though?

Like Mario Kart Wii fun?

My question is, will it still allow Jeremy Clarkson to make lap times 19 seconds faster than what he'd be able to do in reality?