Chances of Porsche in GT6

[Tornado]

isn't porsche owned by VW? in that case, why did the scirocco/golf R's get allowed into virtually every single racing game (not even kidding, I know that at least both forza companies, ubisoft and PD own the scirocco, the last two with racing varients.

The German government put a law in place when Volkswagen was privatized in the 1960s essentially to prevent any foreign company from taking over Volkswagen so long as the government owned over 20% (because they could veto a sale). Porsche the holding company began buying up portions of Volkswagen to stave off any threat of takeover when the EU threatened to overturn that law, and when Porsche extended control to over 50% the financial crisis made it so Porsche couldn't afford to keep ownership. What the Porsche family then did was sell a small portion of the holding company to raise funds, restructured 49% of Porsche AG (the car company) as belonging to Volkswagen AG to lower their debts, and later reorganized Porsche AG (the car company) as a Volkswagen AG subsidiary by selling all of the remaining shares of the company to Volkswagen so they could buy back the holding company so it was once again completely controlled by the Porsche family. So it basically goes Porsche (the car company) is 100% owned by Volkwagen (the car company), which is 51% owned by Porsche (the holding company) which is 100% controlled by Porsche (the family).

The only difference between Porsche/Volkswagen now and Porsche/Volkswagen before 2007 is that the control the Porsche and Piech family have over Volkswagen is more formally established than the loose partnerships and several positions of power that they had before hand. It doesn't mean that any Porsche partnerships established before the merger are null and void; and it doesn't even really mean that Volkwagen has direct say in Porsche's future partnerships.

 

[eran0004]

It blows my mind that you actually blame the company buying the license. Especially with that excuse.

They own the license, of course they are to blame. Do you think they are some kind of victims who just gets contracts thrown at them and are forced to sign under gun-point?

The difference between Porsche and EA is that EA is in the video game business, while Porsche isn't. One can't demand from Porsche to be aware of what's going on in the video game industry, while EA knows exactly what they're doing.

I don't mind them owning the licence, but they keep it to themselves and that is a big issue. It's holding the entire sim racing genre back, by blocking a brand with one of the greatest legacies in the history of motorsports. And what does EA do with that brand? They use it to play cops and robbers.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You really think more people are waiting for old Porsche race cars than for new shiny ones?
I'd guesstimate it's 10-1 the opposite.

Yes because anytime this topic comes up all I really see for the most part is USER X requesting the freedom of race gaming fans to have such and such Porsche from Le Mans. Or some old production model Porsche usually with the 70s Carrera being the most requested. Hardly do I see a big commotion of the newer Porsche at least on this forum. You can guesstimate what you will but from my experience since I usually like to jump on this and the countless other threads that pop up every six months to a year asking the same question just to tell them "no", I tend to see different users having the same request for historic Porsche more than modern.

I'm sure on other Forums it's the opposite but here it tends not to be the case from what I've seen.

 

[Thomas__633]

I want the Cayman GT4 and 911 GT3. Happy now?

 

[Prenny]

Afaik, MS had an exclusive Ferrari license on PC and Xbox. Not on PlayStation.
And it's all a thing of the past.

Edit: See above

Remember that the Ferrari DLC for NFS Shift was only available for XBOX 360? and not on PS3?

 

[CSLACR]

Yes because anytime this topic comes up all I really see for the most part is USER X requesting the freedom of race gaming fans to have such and such Porsche from Le Mans. Or some old production model Porsche usually with the 70s Carrera being the most requested. Hardly do I see a big commotion of the newer Porsche at least on this forum. You can guesstimate what you will but from my experience since I usually like to jump on this and the countless other threads that pop up every six months to a year asking the same question just to tell them "no", I tend to see different users having the same request for historic Porsche more than modern.

I'm sure on other Forums it's the opposite but here it tends not to be the case from what I've seen.

I'm glad you figure out what "the majority" of PEOPLE want based off what the incredibly low percentage of those who go online for racing games.

We'll pretend that those who go online aren't more passionate about cars, and they share identical interests with everyone.
Yes, that's why so many games feature 1970's Porsche's, and NONE have new Porsche's, because nobody likes them!!!

They own the license, of course they are to blame. Do you think they are some kind of victims who just gets contracts thrown at them and are forced to sign under gun-point?

The difference between Porsche and EA is that EA is in the video game business, while Porsche isn't. One can't demand from Porsche to be aware of what's going on in the video game industry, while EA knows exactly what they're doing.

I don't mind them owning the licence, but they keep it to themselves and that is a big issue. It's holding the entire sim racing genre back, by blocking a brand with one of the greatest legacies in the history of motorsports. And what does EA do with that brand? They use it to play cops and robbers.

Porsche gave away their license at gunpoint????????

Figure anything out yet?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm glad you figure out what "the majority" of PEOPLE want based off what the incredibly low percentage of those who go online for racing games.

We'll pretend that those who go online aren't more passionate about cars, and they share identical interests with everyone.
Yes, that's why so many games feature 1970's Porsche's, and NONE have new Porsche's, because nobody likes them!!!

I never said the majority in general, I'm talking about on this forum from the get go. You seem to have a bit of a difficulty in what I was talking about.

Also no where do I say no one at all likes Modern Porsche, you didn't understand the context at all of what I was saying and basically just went on your own tangent for reasons I don't really understand.

 

[eran0004]

Porsche gave away their license at gunpoint????????

What makes you think that?

 

[CSLACR]

What makes you think that?

That's the only way Porsche didn't knowingly and willingly decide to sell their license for money.

I never said the majority in general, I'm talking about on this forum from the get go. You seem to have a bit of a difficulty in what I was talking about.

Also no where do I say no one at all likes Modern Porsche, you didn't understand the context at all of what I was saying and basically just went on your own tangent for reasons I don't really understand.

I skimmed it and missed that you said "at least on this forum". I then caught the "you can guesstimate all you want", followed by more references to the smaller group of actual people, but larger on this particular website.

You can talk about this forum all you want, but even if we pretend there are 168,000 users that aren't duplicates and still post, that's 1/60th of the general GT population(being slightly generous), or less than 2%.

Please don't mistake this for my dislike of older Porsche's either, but older racing Porsche's rank much lower in the worldwide demand than shiny new ones. I can't prove anything and neither can you, I just hope we can agree on this.

 

[PsuPepperoni]

The German government put a law in place when Volkswagen was privatized in the 1960s essentially to prevent any foreign company from taking over Volkswagen so long as the government owned over 20% (because they could veto a sale). Porsche the holding company began buying up portions of Volkswagen to stave off any threat of takeover when the EU threatened to overturn that law, and when Porsche extended control to over 50% the financial crisis made it so Porsche couldn't afford to keep ownership. What the Porsche family then did was sell a small portion of the holding company to raise funds, restructured 49% of Porsche AG (the car company) as belonging to Volkswagen AG to lower their debts, and later reorganized Porsche AG (the car company) as a Volkswagen AG subsidiary by selling all of the remaining shares of the company to Volkswagen so they could buy back the holding company so it was once again completely controlled by the Porsche family. So it basically goes Porsche (the car company) is 100% owned by Volkwagen (the car company), which is 51% owned by Porsche (the holding company) which is 100% controlled by Porsche (the family)..

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I skimmed it and missed that you said "at least on this forum". I then caught the "you can guesstimate all you want", followed by more references to the smaller group of actual people, but larger on this particular website.

You can talk about this forum all you want, but even if we pretend there are 168,000 users that aren't duplicates and still post, that's 1/60th of the general GT population(being slightly generous), or less than 2%.

Please don't mistake this for my dislike of older Porsche's either, but older racing Porsche's rank much lower in the worldwide demand than shiny new ones. I can't prove anything and neither can you, I just hope we can agree on this.

I never said nor hinted it was a dislike so don't worry about me mistaking, rather a non-needed comment on the fact that I'm talking about a very limited pool of people, even acknowledging it as such and not to be a even remotely across the board consensus. And yet after doing such you still feed the need for a rhetorical comment. That's why I've come across as I have.

Yet again if I cared to make a comment on the worldwide demand I would have done so but as far as those who comment on this forum around this topic, the world wide grouping couldn't further matter. I've already acknowledge that this isn't proof as I've said from what I personally have seen, as in from what I solely have seen and not something that is scientific/statistical fact. Once again why you felt you had to comment on something that had all the bases covered only to be told so yet again and pointed to it...is beyond me.

 

[CSLACR]

I never said nor hinted it was a dislike so don't worry about me mistaking, rather a non-needed comment on the fact that I'm talking about a very limited pool of people, even acknowledging it as such and not to be a even remotely across the board consensus. And yet after doing such you still feed the need for a rhetorical comment. That's why I've come across as I have.

Yet again if I cared to make a comment on the worldwide demand I would have done so but as far as those who comment on this forum around this topic, the world wide grouping couldn't further matter. I've already acknowledge that this isn't proof as I've said from what I personally have seen, as in from what I solely have seen and not something that is scientific/statistical fact. Once again why you felt you had to comment on something that had all the bases covered only to be told so yet again and pointed to it...is beyond me.

No, you didn't. You just said "more people"

lack of new Porsche's isn't why most people complain about the manufacture not being in any games outside of EA. More so they complain about the cars that are no longer made by Porsche and were never made by RUF like the race cars.

Actually, I also contest that more people on this forum request older Porsche's to new ones.
Absolute BS, aka no way, Jose.

 

[eran0004]

That's the only way Porsche didn't knowingly and willingly decide to sell their license for money.

Why wouldn't they sell their license for money?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No, you didn't. You just said "more people"

Are you purposely going about this with tunnel vision? I just got done saying several times how my analysis of the situation is limited to this forum, and how as I make comments it isn't about the global want. You acknowledged that in previous comments up to now...and now you want to claim otherwise and say I'm not addressing this forum alone?

Actually, I also contest that more people on this forum request older Porsche's to new ones.
Absolute BS, aka no way, Jose.

Once again that'd require you to search into why I made the comment in the first place, I didn't just say it out of the blue because I felt it was appropriate someone made a comment on the basis of why people want Porsche in games like GT. I made my comment in response to that user because it goes beyond more than that as far as this forum goes. Many seem to feel and express a squandering of such a licenses by EA and wanting EA to be more lax with allowing others to use it so proper historic cars from the manufacture can be used. Really I don't care if Porsche ever see the light of GT or any other simcade/simulator.[/QUOTE]

 

[Johnnypenso]

The difference between Porsche and EA is that EA is in the video game business, while Porsche isn't. One can't demand from Porsche to be aware of what's going on in the video game industry, while EA knows exactly what they're doing.

EA is doing what they are supposed to be doing, getting a leg up on the competition by having exclusive content.

I don't mind them owning the licence, but they keep it to themselves and that is a big issue. It's holding the entire sim racing genre back, by blocking a brand with one of the greatest legacies in the history of motorsports. And what does EA do with that brand? They use it to play cops and robbers

The sim racing genre is better now than it's ever been, on PC and on console, all without Porsche.

If Porsche is so all important to PD, why would they not take advantage of the Ruf brand? Why no new Rufs for more than a decade? Why no premium Rufs? Why no Ruf fantasy racers that fit in with other cars of a similar class like GT3? Ruf seems quite willing to be involved in the gaming industry and works with small and large developers alike, on console and pc. Seems like an avenue to at least come as close to Porsche as possible.

 

[eran0004]

EA is doing what they are supposed to be doing, getting a leg up on the competition by having exclusive content.

I'm sure they're very happy about it. The question is what the consequences are for the gamers.

The sim racing genre is better now than it's ever been, on PC and on console, all without Porsche.

And they would be even better if they had Porsche.

If Porsche is so all important to PD, why would they not take advantage of the Ruf brand? Why no new Rufs for more than a decade? Why no premium Rufs? Why no Ruf fantasy racers that fit in with other cars of a similar class like GT3? Ruf seems quite willing to be involved in the gaming industry and works with small and large developers alike, on console and pc. Seems like an avenue to at least come as close to Porsche as possible.

I can't speak for PD, but in my eyes Ruf isn't Porsche. They build cars that look like Porsches but they have no motorsports legacy.

This is what Porsche has achieved:

• 14 World Sportscar Championship Manufacturers' and Team Titles (1969, 1970, 1971, 1976 x 2, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1983 x 2, 1984, 1985, 1986)
• 6 World Sportscar Championship Drivers' Titles (1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986)
• 3 IMSA Supercar-Series (1991, 1992, 1993)
• 6 German Racing Championship (1977, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985)
• 20 European Hill Climbing Championship
• 15 IMSA Supercar-Race (USA)
• 16 24 Hours of Le Mans (1970, 1971, 1976, 1977, 1979, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998)
• 18 12 Hours of Sebring (1960, 1968, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 2008)
• 18 Daytona 24 Hours as Manufacturer (1968, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1991, 2003)
• 1 International Championship for Manufacturers (1970)
• 11 Targa Florio (1956, 1959, 1960, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973)
• 4 Rallye Monte Carlo (1968, 1969, 1970, 1978)
• 2 Paris-Dakar Rally (1984, 1986)
• 1 Formula One victory (1962)

This is what Ruf has achieved:

• N/A

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

It's actually more of Porsche being more held back by EA if anything, I wouldn't say the racing game genres were held back over one car manufacture. Though yeah, that's why I care a lot more about Porsche in racing games than Porsche themselves, I want to experience their cars more in multiple games and not just be limited to NFS. Of course, I can't do anything about that.

Despite the use of mods on PC sims such as Race 07 and how games such as Project Cars and Driveclub are making good use of "Ruf". It's just not enough for me, I really do want more. Though, as said before; there's not much we can do. Nothing will make EA budge and Porsche just doesn't care.

 

[McLaren]

I wish people could stop complaining about the villans, "EA", and start directing their anger at Porsche, who is actually to blame.
EA is an intelligent company making an intelligent move. Porsche locked their cars away from us, not EA.

Everyone on this forum would have done the same if a company offered you a ludicrous contract to use your products exclusively in a medium you don't do business in to begin with. As long as EA doesn't tarnish Porsche's name or place their products in a negative light, they don't care.

Their created a partnership to benefit each other for money. They're businesses. Zero point in blaming Porsche for this because EA is the one who decided to keep the rights exclusive.

Yeah, probably. That could also explain how Rockstar was able to model Gemballa Porsches in Midnight Club 3.

EDIT: That's all I needed to know, that has been driving me crazy for a while.

Gemballa is a recognized manufacturer in Germany.

Indeed, I understand that about Ruf.
Singer own that car. Are Singer, giving Porsche money for selling modified 911s? Does someone personally owning a Porsche fall under the umbrella of the Porsche licence? Like the Pozzi Camaro? Did PD have to get a licence from GM so they could include her Camaro in the game?
I'm reaching here. I mentioned once before in this thread. Kaz owns a GT3. Could that not be a free DLC and named for example: Kaz Garage GT3?

Per Singer's website:

Singer Vehicle Design restores and modifies existing Porsche automobiles. Singer Vehicle Design is not sponsored, associated, approved, endorsed nor, in any way, affiliated with Porsche Cars North America, Inc., or Dr. Ing.h.c.F.Porsche, AG (www.porsche.com) or RECARO. The Porsche® name and crest are trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG, and any other products mentioned in this Website are the trademarks of their respective holders.

isn't porsche owned by VW? in that case, why did the scirocco/golf R's get allowed into virtually every single racing game (not even kidding, I know that at least both forza companies, ubisoft and PD own the scirocco, the last two with racing varients.

Doesn't work that way.

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

Gemballa is a recognized manufacturer in Germany.

o_O Oh darn, I just remembered something. I think you told me this exact thing a while back. Eh, I must have forgotten. Sorry about that.

If that's true, then that could be another manufacture for GT and other racing game franchises to make use of for their Porsche needs. Though, if it's a manufacture; then it's kinda odd that I haven't seen Gemballa in use for a while.

 

[McLaren]

o_O Oh darn, I just remembered something. I think you told me this exact thing a while back. Eh, I must have forgotten. Sorry about that.

If that's true, then that could be another manufacture for GT and other racing game franchises to make use of for their Porsche needs. Though, if it's a manufacture; then it's kinda odd that I haven't seen Gemballa in use for a while.

It's a pretty low key name that builds specific types of cars. So, they're likely not high on anyone's go-to list if a game is looking for its players to play with production cars that look stock like this:

Than production cars that look highly modified like this Avalanche:

Games like Midnight Club/TXR benefit a lot more with these types of cars the game revolves around.

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

It's a pretty low key name that builds specific types of cars. So, they're likely not high on anyone's go-to list if a game is looking for its players to play with production cars that look stock like this:


Than production cars that look highly modified like this Avalanche:

Games like Midnight Club/TXR benefit a lot more with these types of cars the game revolves around.

Well, that's a shame. I would love to give the Avalanche a go in Drive Club, Forza, or in GT6. Oh, and this thing:

 

[Thomas__633]

RUF won the Pikes Peak with a roadlegal modified CTR 2...
and I think that they love porsche not being in anything, it enables them to make huge quantities of exposure that they wouldn't ordinarially get.

 

[Smurfybug]

RUF won the Pikes Peak with a roadlegal modified CTR 2...
and I think that they love porsche not being in anything, it enables them to make huge quantities of exposure that they wouldn't ordinarially get.

Hey, remember that we might get Pikes Peak at E3 with some other FIA stuff

 

[CSLACR]

Everyone on this forum would have done the same if a company offered you a ludicrous contract to use your products exclusively in a medium you don't do business in to begin with. As long as EA doesn't tarnish Porsche's name or place their products in a negative light, they don't care.

Their created a partnership to benefit each other for money. They're businesses. Zero point in blaming Porsche for this because EA is the one who decided to keep the rights exclusive.

The rights Porsche sold.
Why don't you say what you really mean?
Don't blame Porsche because you like them.

Would you or anyone else saying "don't blame Porsche" be bothered to answer why EA would give exclusivity up, outside of your own personal desires?

Why wouldn't they sell their license for money?

Why is EA terrible, "need for greed" by holding a license, and Porsche is innocent, even though they sold said license for money?
Oh that's right, you like Porsche. And Porsche is a bunch of helpless, idiotic, ignorants that don't know nuthin about nuthin.
It's EA's responsibility to give everyone the Porsche license, I'm getting that right?

Are you purposely going about this with tunnel vision? I just got done saying several times how my analysis of the situation is limited to this forum, and how as I make comments it isn't about the global want. You acknowledged that in previous comments up to now...and now you want to claim otherwise and say I'm not addressing this forum alone?




Once again that'd require you to search into why I made the comment in the first place, I didn't just say it out of the blue because I felt it was appropriate someone made a comment on the basis of why people want Porsche in games like GT. I made my comment in response to that user because it goes beyond more than that as far as this forum goes. Many seem to feel and express a squandering of such a licenses by EA and wanting EA to be more lax with allowing others to use it so proper historic cars from the manufacture can be used. Really I don't care if Porsche ever see the light of GT or any other simcade/simulator.

It sounds like you're actually having the hard time following, that you claim I am having.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

It sounds like you're actually having the hard time following, that you claim I am having.

How so? The playground tactic of "I know you are, but what am I" so rather it seems like you're here to do some ad hominem based claims. I've given what the point was that I was trying to make you can accept what I've said and am explaining to have said or you can keep claiming some personal untruth I've committed (though haven't) and keep pressing a non-argument. But it will just be a cycle that keeps bringing us back to here so I'll move on while you argue with the many others on here.

Edit: The irony here is some people are proving part of why I said what I said.

 

[eran0004]

Why is EA terrible, "need for greed" by holding a license

Because it's them who own the license and they keep it to themselves. And not only that, they try to tell gamers that they don't have anything to do with what cars are available in other games and that it's a matter between the other studios and Porsche, although it's obvious to everyone that EA have been sitting on an exclusive license for a decade and a half.

and Porsche is innocent, even though they sold said license for money?

Because Porsche isn't in the video game business, they make cars. So when someone approach them and say "hey, can we purchase an exclusive license to use your cars in our games?" they don't have any reason to object because they're not going to make any video games themselves and what happens in the video games business in not of their concern.

Oh that's right, you like Porsche.

It's EA's responsibility to give everyone the Porsche license, I'm getting that right?

Golf clap. They've sold the rights in the past, they can do it again. Keeping the license to themselves only means that they'll anger Porsche fans, which means Porsche fans won't buy their games, which means that they'll end up holding an exclusive license for a brand that their audience doesn't care about.

 

[McLaren]

The rights Porsche sold.
Why don't you say what you really mean?
Don't blame Porsche because you like them.

Would you or anyone else saying "don't blame Porsche" be bothered to answer why EA would give exclusivity up, outside of your own personal desires?

Goodness, you're thick. It has nothing to do with whether or not I like Porsche.

When EA approached Porsche with the intent to hold the rights exclusively, they knew they would need to offer Porsche a larger than usual amount of money for it to make up for any other developers that would be approaching Porsche for license rights. With such a large amount of money equaling what several other developers would be giving Porsche for licensing rights over an unknown period of time, from one source up front, of course Porsche was going to take it. That's how a business flourishes. You can cry & blame Porsche all you want, but seeing as they're not in video game industry or have any major stock in it, they were going to agree to EA's deal once that fat check was written because, "Hey! Free money!"

It's as I said; everyone on this forum would have taken that same deal if someone wanted to use your products exclusively in a medium you don't have any business in to begin with. As long as they don't tarnish your products, what do you care if they keep your product from being licensed by others? You just got a large amount of money to make up for the lost business. And with Porsche having such a high following, as soon as the deal expires, those other developers will be lining up on Porsche's doorstep waiting to give them money to use their rights.

EA is to blame if any for keeping others from the licensing rights because they had a bigger checkbook. It's no different from when Sony fans will be pissed that Microsoft wrote another large check to Rockstar for exclusive rights to the next GTA V DLC coming this year. These companies are in the business of making money, not making choices that make everyone happy.

 

[Smurfybug]

These fights, they're somewhat entertaining.

 

[MatskiMonk]

It's as I said; everyone on this forum would have taken that same deal if someone wanted to use your products exclusively in a medium you don't have any business in to begin with. As long as they don't tarnish your products, what do you care if they keep your product from being licensed by others? You just got a large amount of money to make up for the lost business. And with Porsche having such a high following, as soon as the deal expires, those other developers will be lining up on Porsche's doorstep waiting to give them money to use their rights.

No one here actually knows what Porsche and EA agreed to so I think it's a bit pointless to keep debating it, but in principle I disagree that "everyone on this forum would have taken that same deal", especially given that none of us know what that deal was. Completely placing control of your IP, copyright, design and image registrations to a single party within a sector is not automatically a good idea. Exclusivity is good for the person gaining the rights, not the IP owner hence the reason why exclusivity deals do generally carry a higher price tag - they are inherently risky for the licensor. And to ask "why would they care" is to completely miss that normally if you've gone to the trouble of building up a brand and an image you don't give it away lightly, not even if there's a lot of money involved.

Zero point in blaming Porsche for this because EA is the one who decided to keep the rights exclusive.

In order for EA to have the contractual right to sub-license Porsche would have had to agree to it.... In order for that clause to have any validity, Porsche would have had to agree to exclusivity in the first place.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Because it's them who own the license and they keep it to themselves. And not only that, they try to tell gamers that they don't have anything to do with what cars are available in other games and that it's a matter between the other studios and Porsche, although it's obvious to everyone that EA have been sitting on an exclusive license for a decade and a half.
Because Porsche isn't in the video game business, they make cars. So when someone approach them and say "hey, can we purchase an exclusive license to use your cars in our games?" they don't have any reason to object because they're not going to make any video games themselves and what happens in the video games business in not of their concern.

You don't really believe this do you? That Porsche signed a 15 year deal with EA and is completely unaware of videogames? I Or the inference that if this is true, EA should somehow share this exclusive license, possibly the biggest prize in all of sim racing, to be fair to everyone?

Golf clap. They've sold the rights in the past, they can do it again. Keeping the license to themselves only means that they'll anger Porsche fans, which means Porsche fans won't buy their games, which means that they'll end up holding an exclusive license for a brand that their audience doesn't care about.

Or it means that Porsche fans will by EA games because that's the only place they can get them? If you want something and can only get it in one place, you don't go to that place and get it, instead you get angry and don't buy what you want out of spite? That makes zero sense.

No one here actually knows what Porsche and EA agreed to so I think it's a bit pointless to keep debating it, but in principle I disagree that "everyone on this forum would have taken that same deal", especially given that none of us know what that deal was. Completely placing control of your IP, copyright, design and image registrations to a single party within a sector is not automatically a good idea. Exclusivity is good for the person gaining the rights, not the IP owner hence the reason why exclusivity deals do generally carry a higher price tag - they are inherently risky for the licensor. And to ask "why would they care" is to completely miss that normally if you've gone to the trouble of building up a brand and an image you don't give it away lightly, not even if there's a lot of money involved..

Maybe Porsche doesn't take videogames seriously. Maybe Porsche doesn't think videogames = marketing. Maybe Porsche just wants the convenience of dealing with one developer. There are lots of reasons why Porsche would have an exclusive arrangement and not give two craps about what anyone thinks.