- 188
- NJ | FL
- ACDC2TURBO
I guess it depends on how you define unfair advantage. In fact it depends on how SONY/PD define an unfair advantage.
Also that's just from the PSN terms, I haven't and can't be bother to read the general PS3 and game agreements, but they possibly have similar clauses. It's pretty moot though, as commercially it would be pretty foolish, and in my opinion it being published on the official PS magazine website is also a clear indicator, and possibly implies that such use of the glitch is authorised, making it either not a glitch, or allowable usage of the software.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is clearly a flaw in their coding and programming. For example, what if an individual unaware of this "exploit" were to download the v1.01 patch. The individual then purchases any of the "special" vehicles, when shortly after a catastrophic failure were to occur, rendering the console non-functional. Let's propose that this individual loyally purchased another PS3. Let's also propose that this individual had the fore-sight to create a back-up copy of the save game. Now, let's further propose that this individual either no longer has the ability/access to install the v1.01 update and/or opted to remain offline. While playing the game in the original v1.00 format, the individual discovers vehicles strangely labeled "2055" and "2074". Understandably, the individual investigates and "lo and behold", (angelic voices singing in the background), the vehicle can be sold for 333,993,856 credits! Now, after seeing that and recalling the "soul crushing" grind required to earn credits inherent with Gran Turismo and now with the insulting implementation of micro-transactions at $50 per 7M credits, the individual realizes it would be "unwise" not to sell the vehicle. The individual then decides to remain a hermit for days and weeks on end to purchase all the vehicles contained within what would otherwise be unattainable by the unrealistic standards set forth by PD/Sony.
I find it truly insulting that Sony/PD defends micro-transactions by implying that it is an acceptable option to purchase in-game credits to access and enjoy vehicles/content that have already been paid for through licensure with the initial purchase of the game.
"http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-12-04-gran-turismo-6-microtransaction-pricing-revealed"
By Wesley Yin-Poole Published Thursday, 5 December 2013
UPDATE: Sony Worldwide Studios boss Shuhei Yoshida has taken to Twitter to address concern about microtransactions in PlayStation 3 racing game Gran Turismo 6.
In a series of tweets he insisted the ability to pay real-world money for virtual currency which can then be spent on cars was an "alternative path" through the game's progression system.
"The game is just offering an alternative path to busy people," he replied to one follower on Twitter. "Read reviews when they come out."
Then, responding to another: "Microtransaction per se is not a bad thing, how the game is designed around it could become a problem."
An alternative path to busy people? Or an alternative path for "unsuspecting" individuals who can and will pay these ludicrous micro-transactions? These people are the ones who need to be informed of this "exploit" most! To further add injury to insult, at $50/7M credits, it does not even provide ample credits to purchase [1] high-level 20M vehicle! In fact, it requires $190! Are you serious? So with [6] 20M vehicles in-game, it would require either $1,140 in real-world currency or hundreds of seemingly endless hours of grinding to attain? WE, THE GAMERS, MUST REALIZE THERE IS SOMETHING SERIOUSLY WRONG WITH THIS! And, YOU, THE DEVELOPERS AND PUBLISHERS, NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE, THE GAMERS, WILL NOT BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF! WE CAN AND WILL REACT SWIFTLY, VIA OUR SUPPORT AND WALLETS! So what then for individuals who can afford to purchase these vehicles? Is this not an unfair advantage? Now that this can be done by all, this now evens the playing field for all, but on a higher plane. So, in response to the final quotation, yes, the fact that the game IS designed around micro-transactions is not just a matter of "it could be a problem", it "IS A PROBLEM!"
Now, with that in mind, how can this still be considered to be a hack and/or glitch? Have we forgotten the days of Contra and the pre-programmed "up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, b, a, start" or am I merely exposing my age?
Last edited: