Forza 5 Is A Major Dissapointment, Will DLC Save It?

[Joey D]

Unfortunately I think all major titles will end up this way within a couple years. If developers can get more money from the end user, why wouldn't they try? Look at EA, they've been getting away with it for ages now.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

The problem isn't having or not having to use them, it's the fact that everywhere you look there's a prompt for acceleration or buying any and everything with tokens - the monetization is outright discouraging and doesn't leave me very hopeful for whatever becomes of Forza's future design choices.

More and more it's beginning to look as if Horizon wasn't a temporary slip up.

As far as ridiculous choices go it's literally one step below NFS World.

Yes microtransactions suck but this has been going on for MANY years. What is your opinion of GT6 having these microtransactions? Because I am sure you are already aware, GT6 has the same thing.

Unfortunately I think all major titles will end up this way within a couple years. If developers can get more money from the end user, why wouldn't they try? Look at EA, they've been getting away with it for ages now.

Exactly. This is nothing new for gaming. It has been going on MANY years. And no I don't support this and never will. The easiest way to show you don't like microtransactions is to keep your wallet closed and don't buy any of them.

 

[Wolfe]

This exactly. Cost of entry concerns I get, but since when did the sim crowd become more concerned with quantity over physics? FM5 absolutely excels when it comes to physics yet it's being completely ignored by all the naysayers.

Anyone who knows me should know I'm picky about physics, but even as my #1 concern it's not always enough to carry the game.

My disappointment with FM5 lies not with its car list or lack of features, but with its track selection. Even without sampling the physics, I'm sure my enjoyment would be short-lived because I enjoyed almost everything about FM4, yet grew tired of it because too much of the game took place on god-awful-boring tracks -- flat, straight, and monotonous, punctuated only by herky-jerky corners that are often more annoying than anything. Somehow, Turn 10 saw fit to scrap every track I liked from FM4, leaving all of the ones I hated. They've essentially doubled-down on what disappointed me last time. For my purposes, that's enough to cast judgment, even just on paper.

If I had an XBone, I would certainly play FM5, but it falls way short of a compelling reason to buy one (plus the HDTV I would need). That's a huge investment for a game I expect to last maybe half a year (like FM4). I might join the party when Forza Horizon 2 comes around; until then, I'm happy just playing Horizon.

 

[HAL20XX]

Anyone who knows me should know I'm picky about physics, but even as my #1 concern it's not always enough to carry the game.

My disappointment with FM5 lies not with its car list or lack of features, but with its track selection. Even without sampling the physics, I'm sure my enjoyment would be short-lived because I enjoyed almost everything about FM4, yet grew tired of it because too much of the game took place on god-awful-boring tracks -- flat, straight, and monotonous, punctuated only by herky-jerky corners that are often more annoying than anything. Somehow, Turn 10 saw fit to scrap every track I liked from FM4, leaving all of the ones I hated. They've essentially doubled-down on what disappointed me last time. For my purposes, that's enough to cast judgment, even just on paper.

If I had an XBone, I would certainly play FM5, but it falls way short of a compelling reason to buy one (plus the HDTV I would need). That's a huge investment for a game I expect to last maybe half a year (like FM4). I might join the party when Forza Horizon 2 comes around; until then, I'm happy just playing Horizon.

And a totally justified reason. You're actually judging your decision on your needs in a game, whereas so many others are trying to find a reason, justified or not.

 

[Terronium-12]

Yes microtransactions suck but this has been going on for MANY years. What is your opinion of GT6 having these microtransactions? Because I am sure you are already aware, GT6 has the same thing.

I fail to see how GT6 plays a role in this, but sure I'll bite: until we know more there's no comparison to be made, nay, until the entire game appears to be built around monetizing your experience (thus making any experience null in the first place) then there's a comparison to be made.

In GT you can purchase credits which is different kind of evil by itself. In FM5 you can buy anything with tokens and is displayed so often that there are two prompts for XP acceleration in the pre and post-race screens.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

I fail to see how GT6 plays a role in this, but sure I'll bite: until we know more there's no comparison to be made, nay, until the entire game appears to be built around monetizing your experience (thus making any experience null in the first place) then there's a comparison to be made.

In GT you can purchase credits which is different kind of evil by itself. In FM5 you can buy anything with tokens and is displayed so often that there are two prompts for XP acceleration in the pre and post-race screens.

Both are microtransactions providing the exact same principal. If you support one and not the other, you are a hypocrite. No offense.

 

[Terronium-12]

Considering I've never once implied I was onboard with either I haven't the foggiest clue where you pulled that nonsense from.

And you can argue principle all you'd like, but until a single item in GT6 is revealed to be more than $99 the severity of one cannot be compared to the other.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Yes microtransactions suck but this has been going on for MANY years. What is your opinion of GT6 having these microtransactions? Because I am sure you are already aware, GT6 has the same thing.

Okay, do you have GT6 to know it's microtransactions are simliar to FM5? Just because GT6 is going to be have it, doesn't mean people can assume it's going to be excatly the same as FM5 in some sort of way... So. Stop assuming, cause you don't know until we see what it does.

EDIT: Also, all it saids you can buy in game credits, but nobody doesn't know how much it's going to cost.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Okay, do you have GT6 to know it's microtransactions are simliar to FM5? Just because GT6 is going to be have it, doesn't mean people can assume it's going to be excatly the same as FM5 in some sort of way... So. Stop assuming, cause you don't know until we see what it does.

EDIT: Also, all it saids you can buy in game credits, but nobody doesn't know how much it's going to cost.

He's not saying that they are parallels from the same mother in different homes. All he has said is it will have a microtransaction feature just like FM does, it may work differently and have different values but they are the same system which is buying in game tickets. He seems to not like the entire concept no matter what the game is.

 

[TokoTurismo]

He's not saying that they are parallels from the same mother in different homes. All he has said is it will have a microtransaction feature just like FM does, it may work differently and have different values but they are the same system which is buying in game tickets. He seems to not like the entire concept no matter what the game is.

Ahh, okay.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

He's not saying that they are parallels from the same mother in different homes. All he has said is it will have a microtransaction feature just like FM does, it may work differently and have different values but they are the same system which is buying in game tickets. He seems to not like the entire concept no matter what the game is.

Exactly.

 

[Tornado]

The price of the DLC is irrelevant

But they're the same thing!

so is the PR train. A bunch of angry gamers is not an indicator of greed on the behalf of the publisher or the studio.

Ah. So the argument works when it's in your favor:

Unless you want to argue that the current price is at the point of unit elasticity, which I doubt because the public reactions has not been of the kind "what a great deal this is".

But otherwise it's no good.

I don't see what's so funny. After all, "your money will support the production as a whole; and it's no different to purchasing a DLC car."

FM5 cars are a lot more detailed than FM4 cars. More work put on making the cars = higher price.

Ah. I was unaware that I was arguing with someone with such intimate knowledge of Microsoft's finances when none of us even know how much Microsoft spends overall on the Forza games.


So perhaps you can tell me. If the 94% per car increase ($30 for 70 cars vs $50 for 60 cars) in price over Forza 4 for the Season Pass is because of an increase in production costs, what was the reasoning behind the 120% increase in price per car for Horizon's Season Pass ($50 for 53 cars)? It certainly wasn't increased costs, because:

1. A good portion of the Horizon DLC were cars that were already in Forza 4, some of them being DLC for Forza 4.
2. For that logic to stand by itself without any of the proof you're alluding to but don't have, Forza 5's DLC would need to be even more on top of that. And it's actually cheaper per car.

I know for a fact that I'm not the only one who has always wanted to know what the deal was with that; and that I wasn't the only one who blew off the game at least partially because of it.

Guilt by association, is that the best argument you can come up with?

Is your best argument how Microsoft is incorruptibly pure and would never take advantage of customer's expectations to get an extra buck? You keep throwing around how Microsoft would obviously make more money if they charged less, so there's no way that that is the reason that they are charging what they are for tokens.

So explain why they still sell firmware-flashed laptop hard drives for 3 times as much as the specific drives they use are priced. Surely they would sell even more than they already do if the hard drives weren't so outrageously priced, and you technically don't "need" them. Explain the fiasco with wheel compatibility for the Xbone. I'm certain they would sell tons of adapters (that they could even make themselves) and still make a good pile on licencing for the 360 wheels people would continue to buy. Hell, just explain what was up with Forza Horizon's DLC like I challenged you to above. Because none of those things where they priced things out of the impulse buy range seems to have bit them particularly hard in the end, so you're "they would definitely make more money if they charged less" argument rings a bit hollow; completely sidestepping the fact that the entire thing is based on the assumption that you're making that Microsoft read the market correctly for what people would be willing to put up with.

I haven't seen it, but I've read what they say it says.
But of course, all businesses are evil organizations and you can't trust a single word they say

You know, there is a middle line between every company being featured in the Most Ethical Companies list Forbes reports on each year and every company being Halliburton; and strawmanning as if that isn't the case just makes you look foolish. We already know that at least one thing that they said was a reason for why they did something regarding this game (wheel compatibility, which Amar did a great write up about in the thread it was officially announced over) wasn't what they were presenting it to be; nevermind the "tracks in Forza 5 are laser scanned" which ultimately became "tracks we didn't like in Forza 4 were laser scanned" thing; so why exactly are we supposed to take every press release that they put out as being 100% the case?

I read that news statement in the thread it came up in, and I actually thought it was fair enough to do what they were doing the way they described it there. Completely opposite of my views on PD implementing a similar system for GT6. But the way they described it and the way people who are playing it are describing it aren't aligning.

 

[Aki Ko]

Unfortunately I think all major titles will end up this way within a couple years. If developers can get more money from the end user, why wouldn't they try? Look at EA, they've been getting away with it for ages now.

You got a point there. Look at what R* done to GTA Online.

 

[DDastardly00]

Many of the points brough up in this discussion are the very reasons why I am not an early adopter anymore. I'm definitely taking a wait and see approach for Forza 5 and the Xbox One and the PS4 as well. So far I do not like what I am hearing. For now I will just keep playing FM4 and probably will pick up GT6 at some point. If I decide 'to heck with the next generation of consoles', the The 360 and the PS3 very well may be the last consoles I own.

 

[Wolfe]

If the 94% per car increase ($30 for 70 cars vs $50 for 60 cars) in price over Forza 4 for the Season Pass is because of an increase in production costs, what was the reasoning behind the 120% increase in price per car for Horizon's Season Pass ($50 for 53 cars)?

The Horizon season pass was a bundle of $30 for the cars plus $20 for the Rally Expansion. The cars were still more expensive (fewer cars per pack, fewer cars for the expansion), but you also paid for the rally-ized point-to-point courses and associated content. Also, I imagine Microsoft considered Horizon a bit of a gamble; considering they apparently put a pretty steep value on downloads, for bandwidth/storage or whatever, I suppose they wanted to get a little more money back for their publishing investment, as well as investing into a DLC plan for an unproven spinoff.

I would guess FM5's car pricing is related to it being a launch title, where again, Microsoft hopes to get more money back per download because they don't expect as many DLC purchases.

 

[Aftrbrnr]

For me, the microtransactions in FM5 just barely avoid being unacceptable. I say this because it doesn't seem the prices are so steep that players are forced to rely on the tokens (6 million credits will come in reasonable time). Also, we aren't facing a situation like many mobile device games where certain items are only available with premium currency, correct me if I am wrong but I believe everything in FM5 can be purchased with credits earned in-game and there is nothing that can only be purchased with tokens.

I think the $60 car issue is a bit of a misnomer and I've seen friends on Facebook spreading this, I think it's been pointed out here that $60 price only occurs if you were to buy tokens in the smallest denomination to buy more expensive cars, if you were to buy them in a a larger lump sum the price becomes much cheaper, albeit still fairly expensive for what they're worth in the game.

 

[eran0004]

But they're the same thing!
Ah. So the argument works when it's in your favor. But otherwise it's no good.

It's simple:
Consumer attitudes matters when it comes to purchasing a service. If they don't like it, they're not gonna purchase it.

Consumer attitudes does not matter when it comes to establishing what the reason was behind a certain decision. A belief is not true only because it's popular.

I don't see what's so funny. After all, "your money will support the production as a whole; and it's no different to purchasing a DLC car."

The joke: You're mixing up the concepts. That's the joke.

They are similar because the revenue from both is supporting the production as a whole.
They are different because DLC can only be obtained by purchasing it, while tokens fills the same function as credits, which can be earned by playing the game.

Ah. I was unaware that I was arguing with someone with such intimate knowledge of Microsoft's finances when none of us even know how much Microsoft spends overall on the Forza games.

The more details on a model (car or track), the longer it takes to complete and the higher the cost will be (since you're actually paying your employees). Now you know.

So perhaps you can tell me. If the 94% per car increase ($30 for 70 cars vs $50 for 60 cars) in price over Forza 4 for the Season Pass is because of an increase in production costs, what was the reasoning behind the 120% increase in price per car for Horizon's Season Pass ($50 for 53 cars)? It certainly wasn't increased costs, because:

1. A good portion of the Horizon DLC were cars that were already in Forza 4, some of them being DLC for Forza 4.
2. For that logic to stand by itself without any of the proof you're alluding to but don't have, Forza 5's DLC would need to be even more on top of that. And it's actually cheaper per car.

I know for a fact that I'm not the only one who has always wanted to know what the deal was with that; and that I wasn't the only one who blew off the game at least partially because of it.

Speculation: May be because of increased production costs over all. They were working on Forza 5 at the time, meaning that they could make as many cars available for DLC while simulatenously having to cover the costs for developing for next gen.

Was it because of greed? Very unlikely.

Is your best argument how Microsoft is incorruptibly pure and would never take advantage of customer's expectations to get an extra buck?

You don't have to be incorruptibly pure to be innocent. Having done something bad in the past does not mean you're guilty of every charge in the future.

You keep throwing around how Microsoft would obviously make more money if they charged less, so there's no way that that is the reason that they are charging what they are for tokens.

Yep, you got that right. If they really are trying to make more money by raising the cost for tokens, then they're pretty stupid because it ain't gonna work. If they are such evil masterminds of capitalism, surely they must know a bit or two about how to best make money. Seems like a lot of people think that just because it's expensive for the customer, it must be profitable for the seller. That's not the case.

So explain why they still sell firmware-flashed laptop hard drives for 3 times as much as the specific drives they use are priced.

No, because that is irrelevant.

Explain the fiasco with wheel compatibility for the Xbone. I'm certain they would sell tons of adapters (that they could even make themselves) and still make a good pile on licencing for the 360 wheels people would continue to buy.

You debunk your own argument: "I'm certain they would sell tons of adapters". So greed is, according to yourself, obviously not the reason there.

I read that news statement in the thread it came up in, and I actually thought it was fair enough to do what they were doing the way they described it there./.../ But the way they described it and the way people who are playing it are describing it aren't aligning.

Well, who is most likely to know the reason behind a decision? The people who made the decision, or the people who only see the consequences of it?

 

[azrael1965]

For me, the microtransactions in FM5 just barely avoid being unacceptable. I say this because it doesn't seem the prices are so steep that players are forced to rely on the tokens (6 million credits will come in reasonable time). Also, we aren't facing a situation like many mobile device games where certain items are only available with premium currency, correct me if I am wrong but I believe everything in FM5 can be purchased with credits earned in-game and there is nothing that can only be purchased with tokens.

I think the $60 car issue is a bit of a misnomer and I've seen friends on Facebook spreading this, I think it's been pointed out here that $60 price only occurs if you were to buy tokens in the smallest denomination to buy more expensive cars, if you were to buy them in a a larger lump sum the price becomes much cheaper, albeit still fairly expensive for what they're worth in the game.

I am a 40 year old casual gamer and I am bad at racing. I get about 8000 Credits per race. Each evening I am playing for about 1 hour and i earn 100.000 Cr. I still need 55 days to get the F1. I have told myself not to buy any car until i get the lotus and I have just 5 cars in my garage. (BMW M1, Toyota Trueno, Fiesta , GT-R, RS7)
Actually I am thinking about buying the 100€ 20.000 token package, so the F1 would cost me 50€ and it would save me a lot of time. Being forced to grind isn't that much fun using the same few cars on the same few tracks. I guess as a mature casual gamer with money in my pocket I am exactly the target audience of T10. I just don't want to give in yet, before I tell myself , you work 3 hours for 50 € , thats better then wasting 55 hours.
i am starting to believe T10/Microsoft have made a pact with the devil.

 

[Tornado]

It's simple:
Consumer attitudes matters when it comes to purchasing a service. If they don't like it, they're not gonna purchase it.

Consumer attitudes does not matter when it comes to establishing what the reason was behind a certain decision. A belief is not true only because it's popular.

So it does go back to "I get to bring up a point (regarding price elasticity of demand), but when it's used against me it's no longer valid," then. Thanks for the confirmation.

The joke: You're mixing up the concepts. That's the joke.

They are similar because the revenue from both is supporting the production as a whole.
They are different because DLC can only be obtained by purchasing it, while tokens fills the same function as credits, which can be earned by playing the game.

That is a pretty funny joke considering I was the one who pointed out that they weren't the same and specifically asked how they were while you were busy claiming up and down that they were no different at all before ultimately just changing the subject so you didn't have to answer the question.

The more details on a model (car or track), the longer it takes to complete and the higher the cost will be (since you're actually paying your employees). Now you know.

Speculation: May be because of increased production costs over all. They were working on Forza 5 at the time, meaning that they could make as many cars available for DLC while simulatenously having to cover the costs for developing for next gen.

Was it because of greed? Very unlikely.

Ah. So now DLC for one game also pays for development costs of another game over a year away; even though that's supposed to be what raising the price on the DLC for the game a year away was supposed to justify.

So let me ask you: If charging players to buy DLC that they very well may have already bought as DLC on the previous game, and charging them even more than they did the first time no less, isn't greed because the money was theoretically going to be used for something (an odd rebuttal in and of itself, because what else would they do with the money? Burn it?) then what is greed, exactly?

You don't have to be incorruptibly pure to be innocent. Having done something bad in the past does not mean you're guilty of every charge in the future.

Which would be great if that was my point. You're claiming that there's no way Microsoft would raise the price beyond what would be considered reasonable to try to maximize profits. One example in particular of them doing just that later, and now you're trying to discredit the entire point as if it never was brought up.

Yep, you got that right. If they really are trying to make more money by raising the cost for tokens, then they're pretty stupid because it ain't gonna work.

With you still assuming both that it won't work (see: Hard drives) and that Microsoft always makes the best decision.

If they are such evil masterminds of capitalism, surely they must know a bit or two about how to best make money.

For all their extreme overcharging for hardware and components, the $60 paywall to do what these days is basic multimedia functionality, and extremely locked down system architecture; no, it doesn't seem like they know the best way to make money. That's why the entire division has been a pit and various sources inside the company (including the potential next CEO) want to be rid of it.

No, because that is irrelevant.

How convenient for you. It means you don't have to actually answer the question despite it being directly related to the "half price = 3 times sales" claim you keep making.

You debunk your own argument: "I'm certain they would sell tons of adapters". So greed is, according to yourself, obviously not the reason there.

They would probably sell tons of adapters for 360 accessories. That also means that the Xbone would no longer be locked down to devices and could no longer make money on devices that could be required to replace 360 equivalents.

Well, who is most likely to know the reason behind a decision? The people who made the decision, or the people who only see the consequences of it?

So you're one of the people who made the decision, then.

 

[HAL20XX]

@azrael1965 - Don't do it!

Turn 10 will change Forza 5's microtransaction systems "should it be warranted"
http://www.oxm.co.uk/67061/turn-10-...rotransaction-systems-should-it-be-warranted/

Don't purchase any tokens. Show T10 that a change to the system "is warranted".

 

[Brend]

@azrael1965 - Don't do it!

Turn 10 will change Forza 5's microtransaction systems "should it be warranted"
http://www.oxm.co.uk/67061/turn-10-...rotransaction-systems-should-it-be-warranted/

Don't purchase any tokens. Show T10 that a change to the system "is warranted".

Let's hope this just isn't PR Drivel then. You know what to do F5 owners!

 

[TokoTurismo]

@azrael1965 - Don't do it!

Turn 10 will change Forza 5's microtransaction systems "should it be warranted"
http://www.oxm.co.uk/67061/turn-10-...rotransaction-systems-should-it-be-warranted/

Don't purchase any tokens. Show T10 that a change to the system "is warranted".

Good news. Now show T10 who's boss people.

 

[azrael1965]

@HAL20XX Thanks for your advice. I appreciate it.

 

[johnnyp2k13]

didn't horizon have tokens?

 

[Spagetti69]

didn't horizon have tokens?

Can't remember. I had no need to use any if it did.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

didn't horizon have tokens?

Yes.

 

[eSZee]

Good news. Now show T10 who's boss people.

We had our chance with FM3/4/FH. We showed them we'll pay for it and that's why it has gotten worse and worse.

 

[TokoTurismo]

We had our chance with FM3/4/FH. We showed them we'll pay for it and that's why it has gotten worse and worse.

Ohh, I see now. Let's see how this will turn out.

 

[OutspokenFlunky]

Not reading all of the posts on this page I think the MT in FM5 is going to be different than the MT in GT6. Sure they are in a sense the same IE, using real money to buy in game stuff. Where I think GT6 will be different will be the approach to it. FM5 takes ever chance to bomb you with the "hey buy/use tokens for this or this or this" all over the place.
From what I have reads and my take on it is at some place in game there is just one central location with the option to buy credits to use in the game. I didn't think it was going to be a everywhere you turn campaign to push buying credits in this game.
I could be wrong and GT6 will offer this everywhere you turn and then it will be in parallel with FM5 and people can make the same judgements.

 

[MeanElf]

@azrael1965 - Don't do it!

Turn 10 will change Forza 5's microtransaction systems "should it be warranted"
http://www.oxm.co.uk/67061/turn-10-...rotransaction-systems-should-it-be-warranted/

Don't purchase any tokens. Show T10 that a change to the system "is warranted".

Haven't they just changed it to what PD did with GT5? Reduced the price of cars by 50% for a limited period and upped the payouts - that was the news I read this morning.