Support NeoGAF

[Stallion Dan]

I always thought only one GT game was needed per console, isn't really much difference between GT5/6.

Unlike GT2 or GT4, GT6 released when the PS3 wasn't still selling craploads.

 

[RdN]

That's a really poor number for the GT series, but completely expected.

GT6 launched at a very poor date, with marginal improvements over it's predecessor and already lapped (hehe) by the main competitor in Forza 4 and with the next gen offering in Forza 5.

Polyphony REALLY needs to step it up for GT7.

- Develop a REAL AI for the cars. It's RIDICULOUS how bad it is.
- Last gen model cars like they did on GT5 and 6 simply isn't going to cut it.
- Real damage and performance impact!
- Investments in sound design and fidelity are absolutely needed. Get rid of the PSOne tire sound at the corners!
- Online can't be a laggy mess anymore.

I'm skeptical Polyphony can deliver on a 3 year cycle... But really hoping for it. I grew up playing the GT series and I'd love to see it making a come back.

 

[ethomaz]

Somebody on GFPlanet posted that in reply to me.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/gt6-sales-discussion.292590/page-60#post-10948891

It's not from November 2014 and it's not from Sony, it's from the research from Virag's representatives.

The docket 23 from november is not in reference to the paragraph 23rd allegation from the first docket (complaint).

https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/cand/286737/

The original complaint filled in July 31st, 2014 already contained those numbers.

So they numbers are estimated by Virag's representatives from before July 2014.

I guess that is case closed?

PS. Sorry my bad skills to read court documents

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Somebody on GFPlanet posted that in reply to me.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/gt6-sales-discussion.292590/page-60#post-10948891



So they numbers are estimated by Virag's representatives from before July 2014.

I guess that is case closed?

PS. Sorry my bad skills to read court documents

Its not even from SCE?

 

[Loudninja]

Yeah I have no idea whats going on.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Sony has to give owners confidence that their consoles will still get 1st party games late in its lifecycle.

I get that but they should have saved some for their new console. I appreciated what they did as a PS3 owner but alot of people don't see it that way. I think the same thing will probably happen this gen so I'm not really worried about first party

 

[ethomaz]

Its not even from SCE?

The original document to open the case made in July 2014 already had the numbers.
These numbers are research from Virag's representatives.

Sony didn't showed any number to the court (they didn't need to because that was not the reason of the case).

BTW the chartz have a numbers close near July 2014... I won't be surprise if the Virag's representatives are the website.

 

[Vena]

Its not even from SCE?

Yeah I have no idea whats going on.

Looking at the docket, it doesn't explicitly say where the numbers are from (other than the original doc) but they are not explicitly stated to be provided by SCEA, however they are from date of filing.

If there are any disparities, and depending on where the case goes (as reading the litigation a chunk of the defense was rejected with prejudice), then the real numbers will have to come out if these numbers are not them or if VIRAG's estimates are not at least partially informed by SCEA, but only if they are used in relevance to potential damages or compensation. If the numbers have no value to the case, then they will not be updated further.

BTW the chartz have a numbers close near July 2014... I won't be surprise if the Virag's representatives are the website.

You don't generally provide unsourced numbers to a court filing. They likely contacted actual trackers.

 

[lightchris]

What did GT6 even do better than GT5, anyways?

Graphics (if only by a bit), physics, bigger track and car selection, better menus, faster loading times.. it may not feel like a huge jump, but it wasn't that bad either.

 

[ethomaz]

You don't generally provide unsourced numbers to a court filing. They likely contacted actual trackers.

Yeap... it can be coincidence.

The VIRAG's numbers can be even Sony from early 2014... it just shows the numbers are not representative or actual sales.

 

[c0de]

Aren't there any leaderboards from online players?

 

[ZhugeEX]

Detective GAF does it again.

So 2.37m as of Jul 2014. (they can't make up estimate in court so it needs to have actual evidence behind it, probably from Sony or retail tracking services)

What's more interesting is this-

Over 10.89 million copies of Gran Turismo 5 have been sold.

Polyphony say 10.66m as of March 2013. So it seems 5 kept selling in small quantity.

 

[etta]

Detective GAF does it again.

So 2.37m as of Jul 2014. (they can't make up estimate in court so it needs to have actual evidence behind it, probably from Sony or retail tracking services)

So then it did get to about 2.5m in August 2015, right? Estimating used sales as well, would a 2.8-3m users number to date be accurate?

 

[Jakartalado]

Bad time, wrong console, one of the worst racing campaign, bad pr talk from a lot of mistakes made with GT5

I can totally see why.

And I gonna say it right here.

Kaz need to be relocated. He's trapped in the 90s Game Design. Polyphony Digital needs a new Game Director and keep Kazunori as Engine Director.

 

[ZhugeEX]

So then it did get to about 2.5m in August 2015, right? Estimating used sales as well, would a 2.8-3m users number to date be accurate?

Ya know. Having looked into it more I'm not entirely sure where these numbers are coming from. The 10.89m number seems to be an increase on 10.66m

The 2.37m number actually lines up very very closely to chartz. So maybe this actually was a number pulled from Chartz.

That document is written as of Jul 31st 2014. It says 2.37m, chartz is 2.36m as of Jul 5th

And Sony never released data for GT6 so maybe they did just use chartz numbers?

Especially as we have the 2.5m DLC download number from Sony a month later.

But then where does 10.89m come from.....?

Thoughts?

 

[etta]

Ya know. Having looked into it more I'm not entirely sure where these numbers are coming from.

Which numbers, the ones in the OP? Or the numbers in my post? My numbers were just estimates given your 2.37m in 2014. I estimated about 2.5m in 2015 given that people where upgrading to PS4 and game sales are more front-loaded, and then esimated about 10% of that in used sales.

 

[Piggus]

This is the only mainline GT game I never bought. Really should have been on PS4...

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Looking at the docket, it doesn't explicitly say where the numbers are from (other than the original doc) but they are not explicitly stated to be provided by SCEA, however they are from date of filing.

If there are any disparities, and depending on where the case goes (as reading the litigation a chunk of the defense was rejected with prejudice), then the real numbers will have to come out if these numbers are not them or if VIRAG's estimates are not at least partially informed by SCEA, but only if they are used in relevance to potential damages or compensation. If the numbers have no value to the case, then they will not be updated further.



You don't generally provide unsourced numbers to a court filing. They likely contacted actual trackers.

The original document to open the case made in July 2014 already had the numbers.
These numbers are research from Virag's representatives.

Sony didn't showed any number to the court (they didn't need to because that was not the reason of the case).

BTW the chartz have a numbers close near July 2014... I won't be surprise if the Virag's representatives are the website.

Right. Jordan on GT planet should of added a note on this.
Maybe one day PD will disclose GT6 sales xD

 

[Vena]

And Sony never released data for GT6 so maybe they did just use chartz numbers?

Especially as we have the 2.5m DLC download number from Sony a month later.

But then where does 10.89m come from.....?

Thoughts?

You can't provide random internet numbers in a court filing without citation and proof of veracity. You need sources on the numbers you provide that are genuine, otherwise people could quote all sorts of random bullshit in court proceedings to misconstrue/misrepresent a case. "Let me just make this sales tracking website that says..."

A court filing is going to use real trackers for number calls.

If VIRAG wins and pursues damages based on sales potential (ie. brand exposure that they didn't want), then they will most definitely need real numbers. Though by that point, the court would most likely order Sony to provide full disclosure.

 

[ZhugeEX]

You can't provide random internet numbers in a court filing without citation and proof of veracity. You need sources on the numbers you provide that are genuine, otherwise people could quote all sorts of random bullshit in court proceedings to misconstrue/misrepresent a case. "Let me just make this sales tracking website that says..."

A court filing is going to use real trackers for number calls.

But chartz is a "real tracker".

I'm not saying they did or did not. Just this number seems weird given what we know and given what Chartz is displaying at the same time this has been written.

Also this article quotes 10.89m as of Jul 2014 using chartz numbers.
http://strengthgamer.com/2014/07/06/nintendo-can-win-console-war-one-move-2/

Think we solved it, its chartz numbers.

close the thread.

 

[Vena]

But chartz is a "real tracker".

I doubt any court would accept it as it is extrapolated rather than retail tracked extensively.

The only potential hole I see in this is that the court may not have cared about the numbers or confirmed their veracity as they are not directly tied to the case and claim in question. If VIRAG wins the case or the case closes in their favor, then real numbers will be called for and their veracity investigated but by that point I expect the numbers to simply come directly from Sony.

Edit: Oop, there it goes. Guess the court didn't care about what the numbers were then.

 

[PFD]

The game was sent to die. I'm surprised they sold that many

 

[Loudninja]

But chartz is a "real tracker".

I'm not saying they did or did not. Just this number seems weird given what we know and given what Chartz is displaying at the same time this has been written.

Also this article quotes 10.89m as of Jul 2014 using chartz numbers.
http://strengthgamer.com/2014/07/06/nintendo-can-win-console-war-one-move-2/

Think we solved it, its chartz numbers.

close the thread.

Ah man not chartz.

 

[sechsterangriff]

You can't provide random internet numbers in a court filing without citation and proof of veracity. You need sources on the numbers you provide that are genuine, otherwise people could quote all sorts of random bullshit in court proceedings to misconstrue/misrepresent a case. "Let me just make this sales tracking website that says..."

A court filing is going to use real trackers for number calls.

If VIRAG wins and pursues damages based on sales potential (ie. brand exposure that they didn't want), then they will most definitely need real numbers. Though by that point, the court would most likely order Sony to provide full disclosure.

I've seen major business news outlets that I always deemed trust worthy happily quoting chartz. I'm not surprised about anything related to them anymore...

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Ya know. Having looked into it more I'm not entirely sure where these numbers are coming from. The 10.89m number seems to be an increase on 10.66m

The 2.37m number actually lines up very very closely to chartz. So maybe this actually was a number pulled from Chartz.

That document is written as of Jul 31st 2014. It says 2.37m, chartz is 2.36m as of Jul 5th

And Sony never released data for GT6 so maybe they did just use chartz numbers?

Especially as we have the 2.5m DLC download number from Sony a month later.

But then where does 10.89m come from.....?

Thoughts?

Check GT5 sales at the same time frame on Chartz.....I will lol if they gave the court Chartz data. Bear in mind this is some Italian floor company so they may not really care.

 

[ZhugeEX]

So chartz had it at 10.89m in June 2014.

They used fucking chartz in a court case.


Now why is it chartz says 10.61m now but 10.89m last year. BECAUSE THEY MAKE THEIR NUMBERS UP

 

[Y2Kev]

I doubt any court would accept it as it is extrapolated rather than retail tracked extensively.

The only potential hole I see in this is that the court may not have cared about the numbers or confirmed their veracity as they are not directly tied to the case and claim in question. If VIRAG wins the case or the case closes in their favor, then real numbers will be called for and their veracity investigated but by that point I expect the numbers to simply come directly from Sony.

Edit: Oop, there it goes. Guess the court didn't care about what the numbers were then.

Chartz is a source
I am a horse
Don't get a divorce
You are not Norse