February DLC

[Bogie 19th]

Oh. So I need a silly wheel to post here now? BS! This is a forum buddy, me and everyone are free to post anywhere. You, nor anyone can't restrict nobody, just ask the moderators, they'll tell you the same thing.

You're very close to being put in my ignore list.

I never said you couldn't post here. A poster asked if you used a wheel with FM5 to help you determine if it as a racing simulator. If you are not going to "waste" hundreds of dollars on sim accessories or on consoles and not make an educated decision or not whether these are just "games" on consoles. What is just a "game" on console to you is clearly not something that everyone agrees with.

So I ask again, if this is "just" a game, and "just a console", and you can't be bothered to buy a "sim accessory like a racing wheel to enhance your racing experience", then why on gods green earth are you posting in a "game" forum about GT and FM, as they are just "games" on "console" and are not iRacing nor rFactor <sic>.

Did you ever think that those that enjoy the simulation experiences found in FM and GT were just trying to help you by letting you know about their wheel experience to help improve their game?

Ignore me, like I care. LOL

 

[Cosbuster]

What does 560 dollars get you? The ability to pay money for things you've already paid for. Disgusting really.

 

[ImaRobot]

What does 560 dollars get you? The ability to pay money for things you've already paid for. Disgusting really.

Weird, because what it gets me is an Xbox One, and Forza 5.. both of which are things I havnt paid for yet.

Going by what you just said, you must have not bought a new console since the original Playstation/GT1 came out.

 

[JerseyDriverSS]

What does 560 dollars get you? The ability to pay money for things you've already paid for. Disgusting really.

I understand what you meant. Someday others will also, it just may take longer for some people to take there blinders off and see the light.

 

[ImaRobot]

I understand what you meant. Someday others will also, it just may take longer for some people to take there blinders off and see the light.

I understood too, but I'm not sure where he got 560 from when the game is only $60. I'm paying for the next iteration in a series, just like people do for GT, Halo, Uncharted, or any other game that has a number higher then 1 by its name. If its that bad, I will find out on my own, rather then have someone tell me how I should think about something, and then said person talking down on a person for having their own opinion on something.

 

[Cosbuster]

If its that bad, I will find out on my own, rather then have someone tell me how I should think about something, and then said person talking down on a person for having their own opinion on something.

Not really sure where this is directed at.

 

[ImaRobot]

Not really sure where this is directed at.

oh.

 

[Judas Kiss]

What does 560 dollars get you? The ability to pay money for things you've already paid for. Disgusting really.

I didn't know I already owned an Xbox One and Forza 5. Damn, I need to pay more attention.

 

[JerseyDriverSS]

I understood too, but I'm not sure where he got 560 from when the game is only $60. I'm paying for the next iteration in a series, just like people do for GT, Halo, Uncharted, or any other game that has a number higher then 1 by its name. If its that bad, I will find out on my own, rather then have someone tell me how I should think about something, and then said person talking down on a person for having their own opinion on something.

Talking down? Didn't see all that. If anything your smart ass answer to his post wasn't all that great. I'll just leave this thread and let you guys praise.

And what he was trying to say is he payed 560 dollars only to turn around and have to re-buy the same cars he had before in 4 for extra money. Cars that were supposedly remodeled but have the same flaws as previous versions. Coincidence?

 

[ImaRobot]

Talking down? Didn't see all that. If anything your smart ass answer to his post wasn't all that great. I'll just leave this thread and let you guys praise.

You are very much talking down, saying people have blinders on. I was hoping for a reply from him, but didnt get one, so I gave him what he gave me, nothing. As far as praising, I've praised nothing so far, other then the photomode.

And what he was trying to say is he payed 560 dollars only to turn around and have to re-buy the same cars he had before in 4 for extra money. Cars that were supposedly remodeled but have the same flaws as previous versions. Coincidence?

He payed $500 for a console that can do many other things besides play Forza. He payed $60 for a game, that he thinks he's paying for things he payed for again. His money is not wasted as I'm sure theres lots of things down the road. If he was worried about money in the first place, it was a bad idea to buy a console for one game. Also, he does not have to buy anything again.

I am not saying they remodeled everything, as I know paint problems have been present for the longest time. The game does look damn nice with or without those problems. The DLC plan seems to suck, so I will save my money on that part. I will buy this, and see how I feel about it.

 

[BoneSawTX]

when did this mentality of "I paid for it in a previous game so I'm owed it in the new game" start? I'm really thinking most the people who think this have to be 8-13 Y.O.

 

[Terronium-12]

when did this mentality of "I paid for it in a previous game so I'm owed it in the new game" start? I'm really thinking most the people who think this have to be 8-13 Y.O.

Oh, so assuming that a series will retain the content found in previous titles is now apparently flawed?

When did this overzealous attitude of repaying for paid content become acceptable to the point where it's used to refute the point being made that the DLC routine for Forza is becoming more and more draconian in nature? And I'm curious in knowing how you came to conclusion that anyone here that holds such an opinion is 8-13 years old. I won't even bother to point out how needlessly over-dramatic that is, or that it's a COPPA violation.

 

[Cosbuster]

when did this mentality of "I paid for it in a previous game so I'm owed it in the new game" start? I'm really thinking most the people who think this have to be 8-13 Y.O.

So, if Forza 6 came with 50 cars and you had to pay extra for the rest 150 from Forza 5, would it be acceptable?


If this is the "adult" way, I'd rather be 13.

 

[ClydeYellow]

So, if Forza 6 came with 50 cars and you had to pay extra for the rest 150 from Forza 5, would it be acceptable?


If this is the "adult" way, I'd rather be 13.

There's something you forgot to consider: T10 basically had to dump every actionable 3D asset they had as they switched to a different engine for FM5. Of course, if they locked content that was technically on-par with the standard of the new game and was implementable from the get-go behind a paywall, I'd be mighty pissed. But it's different.

And I've heard some accusations of bugs in the painting system that were in FM4 being present in FM5. I haven't seen any such bug. Granted, the most glitchy cars didn't make it on the X1 at all (and I'm looking at you, dreaded GT300 Subaru), but still...

That being said, whoever in Marketing cleared this DLC should be replaced ASAP, as he/she's clearly not doing his/her job at his/her best. As much as I can get behind the reasons of the significantly diminished car list, having another DLC with no "new" car isn't exactly inciting me to hop back on FM5 to do anything more than painting. They seemed to have the formula nailed down with the January pack... Shame.

 

[Terronium-12]

There's something you forgot to consider: T10 basically had to dump every actionable 3D asset they had as they switched to a different engine for FM5. Of course, if they locked content that was technically on-par with the standard of the new game and was implementable from the get-go behind a paywall, I'd be mighty pissed. But it's different.

Let's see how the SL65 Black Series, C4 ZR1, GTB/4 Daytona, R8, and the Mach 1 pan out before we knock that hurdle down.

And I've heard some accusations of bugs in the painting system that were in FM4 being present in FM5. I haven't seen any such bug. Granted, the most glitchy cars didn't make it on the X1 at all (and I'm looking at you, dreaded GT300 Subaru), but still...

While some of the bugs have been ironed out, there are new ones. Bugs that weren't even present in on the same cars and that's precisely the problem some of us have. Presenting the game as new when there are so many things eating away at it—some of which being new as previously mentioned—is going to strike the wrong chord with people.

Try painting the bumper of the SRT10 ACR and tell me what happens.

 

[Cosbuster]

There's something you forgot to consider: T10 basically had to dump every actionable 3D asset they had as they switched to a different engine for FM5. Of course, if they locked content that was technically on-par with the standard of the new game and was implementable from the get-go behind a paywall, I'd be mighty pissed. But it's different.

I didn't forget to consider it. The person I quoted didn't seem to include it in his "equation" for determining one's age.

I would also take the whole dumping of all the previous assets with a grain of salt. There seemed to be at least 2-3 different detail models for each car in Forza4 (aside from the low ones for LOD switching in-race). Even for the cars with no auto-vista mode, the model in the dealership always seemed very detailed, to the point it wouldn't surprise me if it served as the base for FM5 with the moving and internal parts added on top.

I'm no expert in modeling, but if PD can somehow manage to polish the hideous PS2 cars, I'm sure T10 can do just fine with an already high-detailed model. It's also really hard to believe that the forza4 DLC cars were made with no regard to the next-gen game they were already working on.

 

[ClydeYellow]

While some of the bugs have been ironed out, there are new ones. Bugs that weren't even present in on the same cars and that's precisely the problem some of us have. Presenting the game as new when there are so many things eating away at it—some of which being new as previously mentioned—is going to strike the wrong chord with people.

Ah, but this means that those models were retouched, or possibly rebuilt from scratch (from visual assets that were clearly wrong). New doesn't always mean better, and in the case of some models, I would've been far happier if they kept the FM4 model. I'm familiar with some of the new bugs already; it is very unfortunate that T10 can't learn to do quality checks, very frustrating for someone, like me, who enjoys the livery work more than actual racing. But if a car behaves differently, it means that at least the UV map for the model's been redone.

I didn't forget to consider it. The person I quoted didn't seem to include it in his "equation" for determining one's age.

I missed the part about this fine specimen's proposed age calculation equation; some people really know how to be gentlemen, don't they?

 

[McLaren]

And I've heard some accusations of bugs in the painting system that were in FM4 being present in FM5. I haven't seen any such bug. Granted, the most glitchy cars didn't make it on the X1 at all (and I'm looking at you, dreaded GT300 Subaru), but still...

I don't recall this particular bug in FM4, but there is one in 5 where if you attempt to apply a vinyl layer to it that has a stripe of some sort or graphic design, it automatically deletes itself (599 GTO, 430S, ACR, MC12, etc.). Very disappointing, imo, but hopefully an easy fix if they ever get around to it.

 

[BoneSawTX]

Oh, so assuming that a series will retain the content found in previous titles is now apparently flawed?

When did this overzealous attitude of repaying for paid content become acceptable to the point where it's used to refute the point being made that the DLC routine for Forza is becoming more and more draconian in nature? And I'm curious in knowing how you came to conclusion that anyone here that holds such an opinion is 8-13 years old. I won't even bother to point out how needlessly over-dramatic that is, or that it's a COPPA violation.

Assuming anything is always flawed. You don't work there you have no idea what their line of thinking and budget is. If you are going to assume anything, assume to pay for someones work on new content. While you may have had these cars before (in a previous game) they have been updated, someone put in time that needs to be compensated for. There is no such thing as a free lunch, someone is paying for it some where. I sure as heck charge for any graphic updates I do for people, because the print company isn't going to give it to me free because i paid to print the job before.

Now how does paying for FM4 content have anything to do with FM5? They are separate games (not even on the same system, i didn't think i needed to state the obvious), one is not an expansion pack to the pervious game. The only game I get "free" content and updates for I'm paying a monthly subscription for so in effect it's not free. In Battlefield I pay for the premium and get the same thing every time. Unlocks, titles, badges, money, liveries, tunes and rivals leader boards don't carry over. It's a fresh start each time, if thats not what you're looking for then there are PC sims with their own limitations customers have to deal with.

I've came to the conclusion because they sound like my little cousins not getting what they want. Despite being pointed out its a whole new system multiple times, people have been over dramatically crying about about paying for DLC they weren't promised to get for free in a game they knew for months before release was going to have a lower car count. Heres an idea, don't buy it. I didn't buy GT6 because I've grown tired of it's poor sounds, pathetic carry over of PS2 graphics and bland game play instead of buying it and then moaning about it.

If previous FM games are anything to go by, content will be carried over from FM5 to FM6. At which point people will find something else to complain about.

 

[Terronium-12]

Assuming anything is always flawed. You don't work there you have no idea what their line of thinking and budget is. If you are going to assume anything, assume to pay for someones work on new content. While you may have had these cars before (in a previous game) they have been updated, someone put in time that needs to be compensated for. There is no such thing as a free lunch, someone is paying for it some where. I sure as heck charge for any graphic updates I do for people, because the print company isn't going to give it to me free because i paid to print the job before.

You say this...

If previous FM games are anything to go by, content will be carried over from FM5 to FM6. At which point people will find something else to complain about.

...To then close your argument with this. That's a contradiction, and quite a significant one given your point of view. So, are assumptions flawed or not?

As for the rest of your post, are you fully implying that Turn 10 created additional content for FM4 after it had already been released—need I remind you they're on record countless times remarking that content creation does not stop after the game has been released—knowing full well that work was going to be scrapped and then done again from "scratch"?

Not only is that needlessly inefficient, it's also an incredible waste of resources and money.

So I ask you again: When did the assumption that a series will retain the content found in previous titles become flawed?

Especially since you just presumed content will carry over from 5 to 6.

 

[Bogie 19th]

What does 560 dollars get you? The ability to pay money for things you've already paid for. Disgusting really.

Not sure we follow you.

 

[BoneSawTX]

You say this...



...To then close your argument with this. That's a contradiction, and quite a significant one given your point of view. So, are assumptions flawed or not?

As for the rest of your post, are you fully implying that Turn 10 created additional content for FM4 after it had already been released—need I remind you they're on record countless times remarking that content creation does not stop after the game has been released—knowing full well that work was going to be scrapped and then done again from "scratch"?

Not only is that needlessly inefficient, it's also an incredible waste of resources and money.

So I ask you again: When did the assumption that a series will retain the content found in previous titles become flawed?

Especially since you just presumed content will carry over from 5 to 6.

It's flawed because you're closing your eyes, covering your ears and saying i can't hear you to the fact the series went from the 360 to the One. Old content thats been reviewed and deemed poor is not acceptable for a game that is one of the headlines of a new systems release. In FM4 you could tell old cars by the hilarious damage model like the nose of the McLaren F1 Longtail or slightly more squared off lights or lack of details in other models. Are you seriously going to carry that over and then get blasted for it in reviews. Thats just stupid.

Why do you expect to get updated graphics for free? What business where time is put in, is the product giving away for free? You want free content you weren't promised and complain about it. So what you paid for in for a previous game on a previous system. That has what to do with FM5? The misguided thinking that you paid for it so you are owed it for nothing in every FM ever produced is laughable. It was carried over because it was paid for and was on the shelf ready to go, albeit a tad out dated and thrown into the next installment.

I'm not using the word assume, you are. If you want to say I'm assuming I'm basing my reasoning on an actual sample of events. Excuse me for being able to realize FM2-4 are on the 360 and FM5 not so much, it's on the One. I guess I'm giving people to much credit into that being an obvious issue. Now baring a disaster, FM6 has a pretty good chance of being on the Xbox One. Going by the history of FM on a single console they did carry over old content. Their History of carry over content to a new system is limited to only FM1, which was easy to out do. Especially when the quality and level of detail isn't near what they are working with today.

T10's nonstop work means yes, you will run into situations where you are going to have to rebuild art. Happens to me and anyone that works with graphics of any sorts. Every few years when programs update, if not completely go away, to a point where old files are incompatible and have to be rebuilt. Some times it's a matter of months and then your screwed. You can future proof all you want but standards and procedures are always changing and if you have a way to future proof to standards that don't exist yet something tells me you can make a lot of money.

For topic: I like the cars I paid for "again" in the Feb DLC.

 

[buickgnx88]

Here's a better question: why release DLC of cars found in previous games when both here and the FM.net forums have a wishlist thread of cars not yet in the series that could be modeled?

Edit: yes they probably have the general assets available for these "past cars", but they should know that there will be plenty of people upset with this decision.

 

[HAL20XX]

Here's a better question: why release DLC of cars found in previous games when both here and the FM.net forums have a wishlist thread of cars not yet in the series that could be modeled?

Edit: yes they probably have the general assets available for these "past cars", but they should know that there will be plenty of people upset with this decision.

And when they pick a car that's on one person's wishlist and not on another's, someone's still going to be upset.

The biggest issue out of all of this is a lack of sensibility and unrealistic expectations.

 

[buickgnx88]

Well of course not everyone will be happy if their particular car isn't chosen, but it's a little much when, well, none are chosen (unless people of course chose cars that were "removed".)

 

[GranTurismo guy]

You asked for a explanation and I gave it to you.

Whether or not the content is in DLC or the initial game you're still rebuying the content. At least when it's DLC you get a choice on whether or not you want to buy that content 'again'.

EDIT-

Content grew in Forza 5 too....

Should it be mentioned that after 7 years GT5 only managed to have around 200 new cars and 800 GT4 ports without interiors and still poor car sounds? Also some of those 200 new cars were rebuilt models of the 800 GT4 cars and had repeats like the Ford GT.

It's insanely hypocritical to defend the porting of exact content through three games yet complain about rebuilt and upgraded cars(including sounds, interiors, exteriors and physics) that you have the option to purchase or not and won't stop you from playing or enjoying the initial title.

EDIT

Aren't you the one that started this "crusade"?

I'm sorry, but I really don't get your way of thinking:
-players do have a choice to buy the dlc, but old content (and yes it is old and it's pointless arguing otherwise), should have been in the game from the start, or updated in for free. May I remind you that every other racing game manages to improve old content and put it in the next game FOR FREE, something turn 10 don't know. And yes, when you do buy a new game, of course you're rebuying content, it's the case in any game for goodness sake, but forza is making you pay even more to buy old content.
-gt6 has 400 premiums pushing the ps3 to its limit, compared to half that on forza 5. And yes some of the premiums are remodelled cars from previous games, but judging by what you said about forza remodelling content, this is fine. you are contradicting yourself just to bash gt to defend forza. Not to mention all the new and remodelled premiums are in the game without a penny spent on dlc. Speaking of dlc, gt6 has received several new cars (you know, actually "new" to the series? ) as free updates. If gt can do it, turn ten sure as hell can. And yes, While the sounds are awful, saying that they haven't touched the exterior/ interior modelling, and the physics (the thing that has changed the most in gt6), just makes you sound like a butthurt forza fanboy. Both games are great ok?
It is not acceptable at all to sell two year old content, because no one else does it!

 

[GranTurismo guy]

A silly wheel? What? With a racing game surly it's the pad that is "silly"?

Snobs with racing wheels.........

 

[Cosbuster]

And when they pick a car that's on one person's wishlist and not on another's, someone's still going to be upset.

The biggest issue out of all of this is a lack of sensibility and unrealistic expectations.

I don't think that expecting more than 1 new to the series car in a bundle of 10 is that unrealistic or lacks sensibility. Browsing the Forza forums, I saw many of the upset people saying they would be fine with bringing back 3-4 older cars per DLC as long as there actually were some new ones included. How can one disagree with that? Isn't this the most realistic way of keeping as many people satisfied as possible?

 

[ImaRobot]

It is not acceptable at all to sell two year old content, because no one else does it!

Dont really care on the rest, but this made me laugh. Yeah no one else does 2 year old.. some push for a decade or more..

 

[HAL20XX]

I don't think that expecting more than 1 new to the series car in a bundle of 10 is that unrealistic or lacks sensibility. Browsing the Forza forums, I saw many of the upset people saying they would be fine with bringing back 3-4 older cars per DLC as long as there actually were some new ones included. How can one disagree with that? Isn't this the most realistic way of keeping as many people satisfied as possible?

I think you misunderstood me. I was referring to the thought process behind not including the car someone asked for in a wishlist thread.