GT5's reaction to EA's lock down on Porsche, Pagani Huayra, etc.

  • Thread starter pasigiri
  • 626 comments
  • 72,940 views
From what I read Turn10 (having had Porsche in Forza 3) attempted to make a licensing deal with EA for Porsche in Forza 4 but it fell through, despite Turn10 allowing EA to sublicense Ferrari (Turn10 have an exclusive for Ferrari on XBox and let EA use this license in various NFS games). Not sure if it was related to money or a willingness for complete exclusivity from EA's part.

Turn10 showed their business sense by holding out as long as possible for Porsche, but modelling a few RUF cars as an emergency alternative in time for Forza 4 launch. So yes, they moaned about no Porsche, yes they said "EA is bad, you can't have Porsche", but they also got on with modelling an alternative and shelved the Porsche models which were no doubt ready for use. Good for them.

P.S. Each sim offers something the others don't. There's no such thing as a perfect game better than all others, and I can say this confidently because I've played them all. By far the best option is to purchase all race sims on all platforms (PC, PS3, XBox360) and then you have all exclusives irrespective of who paid what to who for licenses.
 
skazz
Each sim offers something the others don't. There's no such thing as a perfect game better than all others, and I can say this confidently because I've played them all. By far the best option is to purchase all race sims on all platforms (PC, PS3, XBox360) and then you have all exclusives irrespective of who paid what to who for licenses.
Click to expand...

That's true, though unfortunately not everyone has monies for such hobbies haha..

I won't be buying another EA game, for sure.. not cause of Porsche only but the newer games just don't entertain me as much as they did before.. Porsche is just a cherry on the top:)
 
What I cant understand is why does porche only want to be represented in racing games from ea where the games play like a childs imagination.

Are porche afraid of having their cars portrayed realistically against others in its class? This doesn't make sense porche make great cars
 
skazz
From what I read Turn10 (having had Porsche in Forza 3) attempted to make a licensing deal with EA for Porsche in Forza 4 but it fell through, despite Turn10 allowing EA to sublicense Ferrari (Turn10 have an exclusive for Ferrari on XBox and let EA use this license in various NFS games). Not sure if it was related to money or a willingness for complete exclusivity from EA's part.

Turn10 showed their business sense by holding out as long as possible for Porsche, but modelling a few RUF cars as an emergency alternative in time for Forza 4 launch. So yes, they moaned about no Porsche, yes they said "EA is bad, you can't have Porsche", but they also got on with modelling an alternative and shelved the Porsche models which were no doubt ready for use. Good for them.

P.S. Each sim offers something the others don't. There's no such thing as a perfect game better than all others, and I can say this confidently because I've played them all. By far the best option is to purchase all race sims on all platforms (PC, PS3, XBox360) and then you have all exclusives irrespective of who paid what to who for licenses.
Click to expand...


Nice suggestion Scrooge McDuck. I think you should take it one step further and just recommend everyone just buys all the cars in real life so that way they have even more choice.

Not everyone is able to buy everything on the market.
 
Here's an interesting thought - the deal is actually bogus now, because, Porsche are owned by Volkswagen, which has signed with PD, so therefore any Porsche that PD want to make into this or future games, they should be able too - the previously 'binding' agreement with f**cking EA is dissolved.

Can someone tell me why this isn't the case?
 
Conza
Here's an interesting thought - the deal is actually bogus now, because, Porsche are owned by Volkswagen, which has signed with PD, so therefore any Porsche that PD want to make into this or future games, they should be able too - the previously 'binding' agreement with f**cking EA is dissolved.

Can someone tell me why this isn't the case?
Click to expand...

wasn't it other way around?

Btw, interesting story there..
 
stigs lil bro
wasn't it other way around?

Btw, interesting story there..
Click to expand...

That is an awesome read....Porsche you clever b**tards.

Oh and to the guy saying Porsche should care about what games they are portrayed in I am pretty sure Porsche do not care remotely about the games their in. They just care about the money (talking about the CEO's etc the decision makers) as shown in the article. Hell I am betting that the sum of money EA gave Porsche must have been a substantial amount for them to not even care about handing licenses to other games because they are perfectly pleased with the EXTRA money they are getting.
 
Conza
Here's an interesting thought - the deal is actually bogus now, because, Porsche are owned by Volkswagen, which has signed with PD, so therefore any Porsche that PD want to make into this or future games, they should be able too - the previously 'binding' agreement with f**cking EA is dissolved.

Can someone tell me why this isn't the case?
Click to expand...

The 2 companies merged iir, not that should really make any difference, could you imagine what would happen if companies were allowed to cancel contracts when they were sold or merged?
 
stigs lil bro
I'm not sure what are you trying to say here:guilty::guilty: Belgian beers mmmm.. haha

Anyway, this thread full of logical fallacies and it is quite hard to find any reasonable discussions here, which are by the way, mostly off topic. Biggest argument stated in Turn 10 favour is that they have more resources available, therefore they are more effective. I'm just going to point out this:

1_Pregnant_woman_9_months_1_baby_V3.jpg


The premise behind this topic is to discuss and raise awareness on two brands in the game that are either not presented fully or at all due to various reasons.

Now, as for Huayra. AFAIK, and I am sounding apologetic here, the car was made available by turn 10 to Forza gamers, coincidentally, in normal one month release, as in January DLC.
For statements against PD for not releasing Pagani yet, they are wrong (so far) because it is not February yet and even if it skips on that one, it might be in April's DLC.

As for the comparison (which I still think it is not fair or necessary) on the number of cars or where they are from, well, GT series are from Japan, they started with PS1 and just now while Forza 4 is out, it is getting expected for PD to do same by some.

At the end, for Turismos sake, stop comparing the two! Enjoy your Forza heaven, and quit bashing GT in this thread!
Click to expand...

Ugh, this is funny, but is not proving your point. So lets say PD has fifty guys. They get 8 times MORE people, having 450 people. Now in one month, maybe they don't get what takes months, but in nine months (or say six years-the length between gt4 to gt5, or say 11 months-the time from release to dlc 1). In nine months, with nine times the people, our first dlc would be a new car. The only 'new' things we have are different carts, rather than "touring car" models of what we already have. I'm pretty sure that simple logic dictated the more workers you have, the higher the possible output.

I am SO excited to get the new Pagani in our next DLC! I mean, it's a pretty sweet ride I'm told. And it's not restricted to ea anymore. And if PD wants to stay half way current with Forza, then they will definitely already have it ready.
 
EA has been having the rights to Porsche for awhile now since the ps1/psx whatever you want to call it. They release a nfs game that only included all Porsches which was Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed. So they been really stuck to Porsche.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
I have to agree with this post as I've scanned the pages back and forth. This one here makes a lot of sense. Though I would gladly say that the same could be said for EA. Everyone knows they're a monopoly of the gaming world or try to be. However, the problem I see is if you're going to get an exclusivity clause to a manufacture then build a game that is actually good, and not a cheap trick or rehash to just make some money back on the exclusivity that you just paid for. Sony/PD are just as guilty like Stephen says here.

There are plenty of legendary and amazing cars that new car enthusiast and racing gamers don't know about and would be privileged to drive and have modeled to great detail. This is a big problem I have with both gaming companies. You have this license but none of the cars that made the car company what it is today. Nor do you even give the said company a long list of cars to show them the respect they deserve or understanding of automobile history, because of abilities like DLC.

I have yet to see a modern console game or even one from years past on any console that has a Gulf Porsche from the 70s or the Porsche GT1, and many other titans.. Same goes for GT, for example all the years of having Aston martin I have yet to see one of the GT1 cars or GT2 cars that were around for years, not even their very succesful DBR1-2. That's just one car manufacture and we're not talking about their cars that made them a big name like the DB3, 4, and 5.
Click to expand...


Maybe not the exact ones you mentioned, but I have to say S2 used the license pretty well in the selection of Porsche cars, imo.

2008 911 GT2 (997)
2010 911 GT3 R
2006 911 GT3 RS (997)
2006 911 GT3 RS Auto Bild Edition
2008 911 GT3 RSR (997)
2009 911 GT3 RSR Falken Tire
1974 911 Carrera RSR 3.0
1970 914/6 GT
2010 918 Spyder Concept Study
2005 Carrera GT
2010 Cayman S
 
GT6mebe
Is it not dyspraxia but I understand why you got that spelling wrong :)
Click to expand...

That's the one. the funny thing with dyspraxia in my case...and before i go further, it varies from person to person, both in severity and how it affects each individual. in my case i have EXTREMELY bad handwriting, spelling (have to spell check more than 50% of what i write), eye-hand coordination and sometimes even my speech is affected. the funny thing for me is that while my hand-eye coordination is affected, driving in R/L i class myself as an exceptional driver, while in game i class myself as below average to average depending on car type and whatnot.


Back on topic...yeah EA and Porsche (@II-zOoLoGy-II,copy pasted from Google...happy now?) are VERY bad!
 
xSNAKEx
What I cant understand is why does porche only want to be represented in racing games from ea where the games play like a childs imagination.

Are porche afraid of having their cars portrayed realistically against others in its class? This doesn't make sense porche make great cars
Click to expand...

Google "Porche" please. If you can't spell it, then you certainly don't know whether or not they "make great cars."

xSNAKEx
Nice suggestion Scrooge McDuck. I think you should take it one step further and just recommend everyone just buys all the cars in real life so that way they have even more choice.

Not everyone is able to buy everything on the market.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... So, those that can should be restricted by those with lesser means? Interesting....

drivingmeinsane
I have severe Disbraxia...do you know what that is?
Click to expand...

Oh really? I suppose that it only kicks in when you need to hit the "C" on your keyboard..... in addition to only being in the middle of the word "Porsche"? Please, we are not all 12 year olds that will believe anything you say.

drivingmeinsane
For those of you who worry about poor Porshe keep this in mind about Porshe mindset...

I remember a few years ago watching a program about super car manufacturers. when it came time for Porshe and it's execs to be interviewed they were asked -i can't remember this verbatim, so it's along the lines of-"why do you not produce more cars per month even though you have the capacity to do so and there is quite a long wating list for new Porshe cars? how many cars do you make a month?" the exec replied "we make 14 cars a month and can comfortably produce 18 if needs be...maybe we will produce 18 this month, who knows!?!" and chuckled.

As i said that was a few years back, so no idea what the manufacturing output is today.

Edit:

Dunno if this has been posted or not:

The Pagani Huayra was officially debuted online with many pictures in a press release on January 25, 2011. The official world debut was at the Geneva Auto Salon 2011 in March.

EA secured the exclusive video game rights to the Pagani Huayra in 2011, available exclusively in Need for Speed titles in 2011, Shift 2: Unleashed and Need for Speed: The Run. This license expired on the 31st of December 2011. The Pagani Huayra is scheduled to appear in the Jalopnik January DLC Car Pack for Forza Motorsport 4 along with other cars like the Ford Pinto, the Alfa Romeo Montreal and seven others.

Taken from Wikipedia, so no idea if that is accurate
Click to expand...

Do I really need to go through and bold all of the C's?
 
Last edited:
II-zOoLoGy-II
Google "Porche" please. If you can't spell it, then you certainly don't know whether or not they "make great cars."



Hmmm... So, those that can should be restricted by those with lesser means? Interesting....



Oh really? I suppose that it only kicks in when you need to hit the "C" on your keyboard..... in addition to only being in the middle of the word "Porsche"? Please, we are not all 12 year olds that will believe anything you say.



Do I really need to go through and bold all of the C's?
Click to expand...


The point of communication is to get the correct message across. Only people of your character place such significance on its spelling and usually for petty reasons. Clearly you know exactly which manufacturer we are referring to so why do make it seem like getting the correct speling is vital?

If I say koinseggg do you know which manufacturer I am referring to?

The way someone spells something means next to nothing about the validity of their message.

I won't speak for the rest but look up swype and try to swype porsche on a galaxy s.

About the buying all formats, consoles, hardware and games I think its pretty straightforward if they could without consequence they would.
 
Stephen220378
Why? EA are willing to pay the money for exclusive licences because they want their games to have something other driving games don't, good on them, they're spending big money to keep their customers happy. Maybe Sony should do the same and stop being so tight fisted and also, it's not as if Sony can't buy the rights to use these cars from EA, they can but they're just not willing to part with the cash to do so.
Click to expand...
The people who keep saying this obviously have no info on the state of the business world.

EA and Microsoft are essentially monopolies, basically software producers who don't make anything, in their fields and in MS's case, are rolling in cash because they sell their software at a rather exorbitant price, especially to governments and major corporations. Which is why a growing number of businesses are going the Linux route, but I digress. In any case, both EA and MS are cash loaded.

In contrast, SONY is a major manufacturer - i.e. they actually make stuff, and due to the global depression have been hurting quite a bit in the electronic manufacturing division. While the studios and computer entertainment divisions have been doing pretty well, they've been relying on these income streams to keep the electronics division afloat. And thanks to the confused picture both SONY and the press have made of this, it's unclear if SONY has even made a profit the past few years. Anyhow, the short of it is that SONY isn't rich, doesn't have huge money bins they can raid to throw at car companies to buy lots of high dollar licenses. If a husband and wife each have a nice income, but have a daughter with serious cancer, they aren't going to have as much money to throw around as their neighbors.

Maybe most of what we have in GT5 is what they could afford. They obviously have the funds for a few things, but it's not simply because of greed that we don't have all the awesome rides in GT5 that other games have.
 
Tenacious D
The people who keep saying this obviously have no info on the state of the business world.

EA and Microsoft are essentially monopolies, basically software producers who don't make anything, in their fields and in MS's case, are rolling in cash because they sell their software at a rather exorbitant price, especially to governments and major corporations. Which is why a growing number of businesses are going the Linux route, but I digress. In any case, both EA and MS are cash loaded.

In contrast, SONY is a major manufacturer - i.e. they actually make stuff, and due to the global depression have been hurting quite a bit in the electronic manufacturing division. While the studios and computer entertainment divisions have been doing pretty well, they've been relying on these income streams to keep the electronics division afloat. And thanks to the confused picture both SONY and the press have made of this, it's unclear if SONY has even made a profit the past few years. Anyhow, the short of it is that SONY isn't rich, doesn't have huge money bins they can raid to throw at car companies to buy lots of high dollar licenses. If a husband and wife each have a nice income, but have a daughter with serious cancer, they aren't going to have as much money to throw around as their neighbors.

Maybe most of what we have in GT5 is what they could afford. They obviously have the funds for a few things, but it's not simply because of greed that we don't have all the awesome rides in GT5 that other games have.
Click to expand...

I'll trade you 50 GTR's, 40 Miata's, and 10 RX-7's for a Koenigsegg. Not even the new ones, or the R Black Editions. Just a simple CCX in premium will do.
 
skazz
Turn10 showed their business sense by holding out as long as possible for Porsche, but modelling a few RUF cars as an emergency alternative in time for Forza 4 launch. So yes, they moaned about no Porsche, yes they said "EA is bad, you can't have Porsche", but they also got on with modelling an alternative and shelved the Porsche models which were no doubt ready for use. Good for them.
Click to expand...


Quality post here. Doesn't it upset you that arcade games like Driver: San Francisco have CURRENT RUFs while Gran Turismo has older models from over a decade ago?

Man, I really wonder about PD sometimes....Here's to hoping they make a huge dent into adding new manufacturers (Koenigsegg, De Tomaso, Bentley, Noble, etc) or at least making some of the standard manufacturers into premiums (Cadillac, Pontiac, Plymouth, Chrysler, RUF).

If seeing is believing, then what we are seeing is incompetence, uninterest or perhaps apathy. Who knows.....
 
Vaxxtx
Maybe not the exact ones you mentioned, but I have to say S2 used the license pretty well in the selection of Porsche cars, imo.

2008 911 GT2 (997)
2010 911 GT3 R
2006 911 GT3 RS (997)
2006 911 GT3 RS Auto Bild Edition
2008 911 GT3 RSR (997)
2009 911 GT3 RSR Falken Tire
1974 911 Carrera RSR 3.0
1970 914/6 GT
2010 918 Spyder Concept Study
2005 Carrera GT
2010 Cayman S
Click to expand...

That's not really using the license well even. There is no Tubro new or old which is pretty important since it's awd, there is no 959 which was a Supercar of the 80s. The mid to late 90s 911 GT1 that race le mans is important. The 917 series that were winning in Le Mans series races and Can-Am in the early 70s are important along with its brief F1 run earlier than that. Or newer Porsche LMP cars like the RS Spyder. Yet time and time again those cars aren't seen. The Porsche Cayenne is another important piece as well.

The list given here isn't all that wonderful, the 918 is good the 914 isn't too bad either. The others are just generic porsche's that don't stand out much
GT3 I guess it could, but the others are basic for the gamer to understand what and who Porsche is. However, that is somewhat subjective. Also you missed the point. If S2 and others were good games or built up to be a true sim maybe that list would hold water, but having a beat and bash em arcade game doesn't do them justice. Porsche also doesn't do themselves justice by letting it happen.
 
Last edited:
Tenacious D
The people who keep saying this obviously have no info on the state of the business world.

EA and Microsoft are essentially monopolies, basically software producers who don't make anything, in their fields and in MS's case, are rolling in cash because they sell their software at a rather exorbitant price, especially to governments and major corporations. Which is why a growing number of businesses are going the Linux route, but I digress. In any case, both EA and MS are cash loaded.

In contrast, SONY is a major manufacturer - i.e. they actually make stuff, and due to the global depression have been hurting quite a bit in the electronic manufacturing division. While the studios and computer entertainment divisions have been doing pretty well, they've been relying on these income streams to keep the electronics division afloat. And thanks to the confused picture both SONY and the press have made of this, it's unclear if SONY has even made a profit the past few years. Anyhow, the short of it is that SONY isn't rich, doesn't have huge money bins they can raid to throw at car companies to buy lots of high dollar licenses. If a husband and wife each have a nice income, but have a daughter with serious cancer, they aren't going to have as much money to throw around as their neighbors.

Maybe most of what we have in GT5 is what they could afford. They obviously have the funds for a few things, but it's not simply because of greed that we don't have all the awesome rides in GT5 that other games have.
Click to expand...

I think i've seen you mention something like this before. :sly:
 
They need to pay EA. Exclusive rights must be too expensive. If everyone go for exclusive license then you will need to buy 7-8 racing games to have specific cars, tracks as it cannot be avaliable on other games :confused:
 
xSNAKEx
The point of communication is to get the correct message across. Only people of your character place such significance on its spelling and usually for petty reasons. Clearly you know exactly which manufacturer we are referring to so why do make it seem like getting the correct speling is vital?

If I say koinseggg do you know which manufacturer I am referring to?

The way someone spells something means next to nothing about the validity of their message.

I won't speak for the rest but look up swype and try to swype porsche on a galaxy s.

About the buying all formats, consoles, hardware and games I think its pretty straightforward if they could without consequence they would.
Click to expand...

Anyone with any knowledge of public speaking knows that credibility is not simply handed to the person trying to convey a message. You have to earn it from your audience. It doesn't matter the message or the medium, if you cannot build credibility than your message is pointless.

Imagine the Speaker of the House covering a topic on the U.S. Constitution and repeatedly referring to amendments as "anemanents." How much faith would people put into their message after this? Do we know what they were talking about? Yes. Doesn't mean they don't look like an idiot and have made their message mean nothing.

If you don't think proper grammar is important but calling individuals "Scrooge McDuck" is a good message, then you might want to have a look at the AUP.

Food for thought.

CorvetteConquer
Quality post here. Doesn't it upset you that arcade games like Driver: San Francisco have CURRENT RUFs while Gran Turismo has older models from over a decade ago?

Man, I really wonder about PD sometimes....Here's to hoping they make a huge dent into adding new manufacturers (Koenigsegg, De Tomaso, Bentley, Noble, etc) or at least making some of the standard manufacturers into premiums (Cadillac, Pontiac, Plymouth, Chrysler, RUF).

If seeing is believing, then what we are seeing is incompetence, uninterest or perhaps apathy. Who knows.....
Click to expand...

I would love to see Koenigsegg in GT. Hopefully, they have the audio to back up the model by then.
 
Last edited:
II-zOoLoGy-II
Anyone with any knowledge of public speaking knows that credibility is not simply handed to the person trying to convey a message. You have to earn it from your audience. It doesn't matter the message or the medium, if you cannot build credibility than your message is pointless.

Imagine the Speaker of the House covering a topic on the U.S. Constitution and repeatedly referring to amendments as "anemanents." How much faith would people put into their message after this? Do we know what they were talking about? Yes. Doesn't mean they don't look like an idiot and have made their message mean nothing.

If you don't think proper grammar is important but calling individuals "Scrooge McDuck" is a good message, then you might want to have a look at the AUP.

Food for thought.
Click to expand...

You make a good point but can't the two of you get back to the topic at hand.
 
kimi123
They need to pay EA. Exclusive rights must be too expensive. If everyone go for exclusive license then you will need to buy 7-8 racing games to have specific cars, tracks as it cannot be avaliable on other games :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes it's called a sub license and exactly what T10 had up until F4 for reasons already covered in this thread. PD never had one, why they didn't only they and EA know.
 
SimonK
Yes it's called a sub license and exactly what T10 had up until F4 for reasons already covered in this thread. PD never had one, why they didn't only they and EA know.
Click to expand...

Maybe because Sony has a superiority complex like EA and doesn't feel they should pay EA to use a License from Porsche. OR they will wait it out and try to get the license next time around.
 
II-zOoLoGy-II
Anyone with any knowledge of public speaking knows that credibility is not simply handed to the person trying to convey a message. You have to earn it from your audience. It doesn't matter the message or the medium, if you cannot build credibility than your message is pointless.

Imagine the Speaker of the House covering a topic on the U.S. Constitution and repeatedly referring to amendments as "anemanents." How much faith would people put into their message after this? Do we know what they were talking about? Yes. Doesn't mean they don't look like an idiot and have made their message mean nothing.

If you don't think proper grammar is important but calling individuals "Scrooge McDuck" is a good message, then you might want to have a look at the AUP.
Click to expand...

Since you want to be such a grammar nazi, I thought I would point out some things in you post.

1. In this context, it's then, not than.
2. A double negative is not proper grammar.

See, we all make mistakes, so why don't you can it with the elitist English teacher crap.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

PaTrond
  • Locked
EA is evil! Huayra game-patented?!
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
9K
prisonermonkeys
prisonermonkeys
H
The unrealistic expectations around Need for Speed
Replies
20
Views
5K
rcgldr
R
W
  • Locked
Porsche vs Electronic Arts, who is to blame?
Replies
6
Views
969
Gravitron
Gravitron
D
Need For Speed 2022 - A Dialogue
Replies
0
Views
1K
DaRudeDude00
D
George Jakob
My final goodbye to GT Sport (A GT Sport retrospective) .
Replies
4
Views
2K
George Jakob
George Jakob

Latest Posts

Back