Gran Turismo Creator Hoped For ‘Something More Incredible’ Than PSVR

by Jamie Feltham • June 23rd, 2017

Gran Turismo Sport is coming out later this year, but the promised PlayStation VR (PSVR) support is sounding increasingly underwhelming. From the sounds of it, the game’s developer isn’t too impressed either.

Speaking to VentureBeat, Gran Turismo creator and director Kazunori Yamauchi noted that he had hoped current VR technology like PSVR would be better than it currently is.

“The first head-mounted display was created before I was born, around 1962,” Yamauchi explained at E3 last week. “I’ve been waiting for more than 50 years. After all that time, I’d hoped it would be something more incredible than it is today. But we’ve done the best we can with what’s currently available.”

Gran Turismo Sport’s ‘best’ is a VR tour mode offering around a third of the game’s tracks in which every car can be driven in one-on-one races. If you want to race with more cars then, sadly, you’ll have to take the headset off.

Still, Yamauchi has high hopes for the future: “Once we get to dual 8Ks, it’ll be pretty nice,” he said. “Dual 8K and about a 200Hz refresh rate. Maybe in another 50 years?”

Currently PSVR has a 1080p OLED display with a 120Hz refresh rate, so it has some ways to go before it hits Yamauchi’s expectations, though we doubt it will take 50 years. The Gran Turismo series is known for its pursuit of visual and mechanical perfection, so we can understand the developer’s frustrations, but it’s disappointing GT Sport won’t offer more robust PSVR support as seen with games like DiRT Rally and Driveclub VR. Even with the limitations of the display, racing games remain one of VR’s most immersive genres, especially with a racing wheel peripheral, so we’re still keen to check out the limited support. It was at least a cool tech demo for E3.

Gran Turismo Sport is expected to hit PS4 this fall.

What's your reaction?
Like
Wow
100%
LOL
0%
Dislike
0%
  • Nate

    I had hoped for something ‘more incredible’ with the VR portion of Gran Turismo Sport but am feeling unimpressed. Looks like I won’t be buying it until the displays hit 8k for each eye. 😉 😉 (dual 8k winking emoji’s)

    • Agreed. I’m personally a Forza Motorsport fan but was thinking of Getting GT Sport for the sole reason of playing in VR. Thinking I’ll pass on GT Sport.

    • doctorhino

      I think his point is since it has to support the original PS4 and the pro he can’t push the full processing power he needs to render multiple cars. Something that would have been solved in an environment like the PC. So yeah, it probably sucks to have a game that would have been great in other headsets but be stuck with the PSVR.

  • mbze430

    Thank goodness for PCars2 on PC and VIve/Rift.

    • daveinpublic

      If he can’t make it work, there will be others to step in a grab their own piece of the pie.

  • crazysapertonight

    I really don’t undestand PSVR players… why not to get PC VR and play with much better quality..

    • Stranger On The Road

      let me see…. cheaper, simpler and just works. In other words, good enough, just like the consoles in general.

      • crazysapertonight

        I can’t say PSVR + PS4 Pro is much cheaper than proper PC with Oculus Rift taking into account the difference in quality they give.

        >> simple and just works
        just like Oculus Rift

        • Stranger On The Road

          but you don’t have to have to PS4 PRo to get the PSVR, do you? It works just fine with the standard PS4. And also keep in mind that almost no body is saying that they bought the PS4 just for the PSVR.

          People already have the PS4 so they go for the PSVR, the same way that people who have a gaming PC go for Rift/Vive.

          So yes, cheaper, simple and just works; in other words: good enough. Any argument you make about the difference between gaming on the PC and console would work here.

          P.S. didn’t write that OR was complicated or that it didn’t work.

          • crazysapertonight

            PS4 Pro was produced for VR.

          • Stranger On The Road

            no it wasn’t, people believed that but it wasn’t. The PSVR works perfectly fine with the normal PS4. The PS4 Pro was made to help interrupt and reduce the number of people leaving the PS4 for the PC by giving them a better option on the PS4.

    • MowTin

      They usually already have a PS4 but not a decent PC. So, it’s much cheaper to get a PSVR. Also Rift/Vive require more room and setting up of cameras/sensors.

      But yes, PC VR is infinitely better.

  • Asif Patel

    Its more the consoles limiting the vr headset more than anything. But even with all that being said its more or less just lazy ass development or something here. Rather than make excuses he should see what others are achieving first with this so called limited vr system and console. Its obvious these guys take too much pride towards their visuals.

    These guys are obssesed over something that doesn’t matter as much and have missed a huge opportunity. Probably even a game changer I had quite a few friends who thought of purchasing a whole psvr system for gt sport vr and I’ve seen alot of mentions on gtplanet forums too. Just a massive missed opportunity even if the psvr community is small it could’ve been the title everyone remembered in say like 10 years time. Just like how most of of remember playing gran turismo for the first time.

    • Brandon Smith

      I dislike the use of the word “lazy” to talk about professional developers, but you are right that they made decisions that led them away from VR. They could have done otherwise. They chose not to.

  • Stranger On The Road

    click baiting much with the headline? As he has spoken about the current state of VR in general, not the PSVR in particular.

  • Rob

    I hope it doesn’t take 50 years! VR could be spectacularly good if they somehow hurry up and improve it !

  • Tommy

    those are only excuses for his lazyness

  • MowTin

    50 years to dual 8k 200Hz? Maybe 10 years. And we don’t really need dual 8k with proper floviation techniques. So, maybe 5 years before we see ultra clear VR.

    Progress is not linear.

    • polysix

      yeah he’s way off with his 50 years, though I guess he was being flippant due to his original ‘waited 50 years’ thing.

  • Toby Zuijdveld

    What a coincidence, I was hoping for something more incredible than what support GT have given VR.

  • Brandon Smith

    It is, as they say, “a poor workman who blames his tools”.

    Resolution means absolutely nothing to me as a gamer. Blaming the hardware is the same reason why there were so few multiplayer games in the early days of PS1, and all multiplayer was 1v1 despite the Genesis and Super Nintendo not having that limitation.

    The reality is that development is all about decisions. They COULD have made a GT game that had better VR than 1v1 racing. They chose not to. It’s a valid decision, but it’s not the PS4s fault.

    • Sentsuizan

      Resolution means a lot in terms of the experience you get in VR. There’s a lot less detail since it’s right next to your face, to the point where something like a logo on the car ahead of you is represented by only a couple of the display pixels.

      • RenderCloud

        Sure. You’re right. But the question is, “why design a game where a principal factor in it’s enjoyment is being able to see a logo on the car ahead of you?”

        If the game design is good enough, and the technology is advanced enough, the quality of the resolution should be a trivial matter to core gamers.

        Sure, there are going to be some people who won’t take a trip to the moon until there is a four star hotel on it. But for true adventurers and open minds, they will go as soon as it’s possible. They will go because the trip in and of itself is what’s fun.

        • Sentsuizan

          “why design a game where a principal factor in it’s enjoyment is being able to see a logo on the car ahead of you?”

          Because there is a niche for it. You’re missing the point. It’s not just about a logo. It’s about detail. For sim games in particular, detail is extremely important down to the exhaust note of the car you’re supposed to be driving. If it doesn’t handle, look, or sound like what it’s supposed to be then why call it a simulation?

          In a more general sense higher resolution is needed for VR just to keep up with the standard experience. On the old DK Oculus for example, in some games you literally cannot even read text. At a distance, objects look less like what they are and become blobs. Even in current gen headsets you can see the lines between individual pixels. Immersion is a selling point of VR and it ruins immersion when you can’t actually tell what you’re looking at. There’s a constant reminder that there’s a screen strapped to your face.

          • RenderCloud

            I’m not “missing the point”, I’m saying that point is just silly.

            “For sim games in particular, detail is extremely important down to the exhaust note of the car you’re supposed to be driving. If it doesn’t handle, look, or sound like what it’s supposed to be then why call it a simulation?”

            Because you’re sitting in an accurate recreation of the car that is in VIRTUAL freaking REALITY.

            “There’s a constant reminder that there’s a screen strapped to your face.”

            Yes. Because it’s a video game.

            The idea that developers have an onus to make you have a psychotic break from reality and think you have been transported into another dimensions is ABSURD.

            Virtual Reality is technology. And the current state of the technology is that screens aren’t as high of a resolution as what is capable from 2D flat panels. It is not going to change anytime soon because of the economics of the situation. It’s not “sophisticated” to demand that brand new technology be even better than the best that’s currently possible, it’s just childish and whiney.

          • Sentsuizan

            “Because you’re sitting in an accurate recreation of the car that is in VIRTUAL freaking REALITY”
            Virtual reality isn’t necessarily realistic. Something like Surgeon Simulator isn’t the same as something like Project Cars.
            “The idea that developers have an onus to make you have a psychotic break from reality and think you have been transported into another dimensions is ABSURD.”
            That’s not what people are saying at all though. No need to strawman here, it’s just video games.

            “the current state of the technology is that screens aren’t as high of a resolution as what is capable from 2D flat panels.”
            Because of cost, not because it’s the best currently possible. When creating the next generation of devices there is, by necessity, prioritization on what to improve within the budget they have. How is it “childish and whiney” to tell developers what the customers want? It’s called feedback and there is a reason that companies pay a shitload of money to people for maintaining a social media presence and running focus tests.

          • RenderCloud

            “Virtual reality isn’t necessarily realistic.”

            I never said it was. I don’t think it has to be. My point is that the tradeoff for larger pixels is VIRTUAL REALITY. Yes the pixels are larger because you are able to look around the car, move your head to look closer at things, virtually adjust in-game objects etc. What you lose in immaterial gameplay concepts like image resolution, you gain in massive gameplay innovations like being able to check your mirrors or look out your back window if you need to.

            “Because of cost, not because it’s the best currently possible. When creating the next generation of devices there is, by necessity, prioritization on what to improve within the budget they have. How is it “childish and whiney” to tell developers what the customers want?”

            It’s childish and whiney because what these supposed customers want is “everything”. The resolution of the monitors is what it is because that’s the state of current technology. For the cost? Yes. For the cost. Because they can’t sell a product to a wide number of customers that costs 4000.00. That’s just basic economic sense. Whining about the resolution of the monitors is exceptionally childish because, as you say, it clearly WILL get better. The technology exists and will exist. So what is to complain about? It is what it is. And you just admitted that you know WHY it’s the way it is. So why CHOOSE to take emphasis off the innovations and gameplay breakthroughs that happen with Virtual Reality and instead whine about completely innocuous nonsense?

  • Ninjai71

    I will not buy any racing sim without decent vr support any further! Big fail from Polyphony Digital! Optics are not everything!

  • Thomas Bonjour

    If GranTurismo is aiming perfection in graphisms and VR, it should go on PC instead of PS4

  • Bitekr

    Oh well. After playing Drive Club in Vr I do note think I can play another racing game on standard screen. Sorry but GT is boring as hell on standard Tv. I rather take lesser visuals on PsVR because the experience is out of this world. So I guess my money will vote for Dirt Rally and other developers who are not afraid to take some risks. Gaming on PsVR is just so m