Most ridiculous thing to ask to be "implemented" in a game.
Screw whatever the OP stated. Pay to get cars? Pay to get content that was supposed to be on the game since day 1?
NO!!! BIG NO!!!
It's confirmed we are going to have 420 (very high quality) cars in the game at launch alongside a plethora of tracks, most of which are already in GT Sport.
Hopefully PD sticks with what they did in GT Sport... Keep adding 4-5 cars per month for a big period of time. As well as tracks (hopefully real life tracks).
GT4 had over individual 600 cars (not counting "dupes") and an insanely gigantic career mode. No reason GT7 with all these years (they are working on it ever since the release of the PS4 ffs) can't pull off the same. 70€ for the game is already going to be enough.
People fail to realize that Sony has massively profited from every Gran Turismo game so far... Make the fanbase happy and they will keep buying from you. That's how all companies have to think, with ofc, a margin of profit but not being overly greedy in which PD isn't, like EA and Ubisoft.
Did you even read the original post? You understand why you received all of that content for free in the first place? Folks who bought GT Sport at launch received a threadbare game that deservedly received mixed reviews at the time. I was hugely disappointed with the vanilla title and for a moment thought I was done with Gran Turismo. A great simulator, but a terrible game.
To charge for DLC at that point would have been criminal. Within a year we finally had a game that could be considered complete thanks to an aggressive DLC campaign. In time GT League become fully fleshed out with a respectable vehicle roster and impressive track count. Fans who wanted a more traditional Gran Turismo were treated to a campaign that vaguely resembled past iterations (without Championships of course).
GT7 on the other hand should be a feature complete game thanks to a huge library of assets to work with. Polyphony have had plenty of time to create a game that shouldn't require a DLC program
at all. At launch it should be finished, no excuses. So where's the incentive for Polyphony to keep adding DLC free of charge? Let me be clear, my proposal for a season pass was to push the developer in providing additional support to a title that should be feature complete at launch.
Deliberate holding back content however I throughly disagree with. DLC in my eyes should extend the life of a game, not serve as a means to catch up on an unfinished product.
A season pass done right can provide huge value of money. I've gotten at least 50 hours apiece for those issued with Assassin's Creed Odyssey and Destiny 2 over the last year. I was more than happy to pay £15 approx to each developer for the privilege of additional content. Content developed long after the vanilla titles had gone gold featuring already significant playtime. One area of opportunity as I've stated is perhaps a means of providing free access to $20 million unicorn vehicles. I lead a busy life, I do not have hours upon hours to grind away on the same boring race for the privilege of driving a Ferrari 250 GTO. Otherwise what is the point of even modelling it in the first place if such a tiny percentage of the player base are only getting chance to drive it? Seasonally exotics in Destiny 2 are available day 1 to season pass holders, eliminating the need for a grind. It's a good system if you ask me.
Polyphony are in an awkward position here. They've established a precedent with GT Sport, as evident by the survey, that fans expect all future content for free. They're damned if the do (charge) and damned if they don't (release any more content).
I'm stunned by how many people expect something for nothing. Probably the same kind of people who never tip in restaurants I imagine. If a developer has earned your appreciation then show some gratitude and don't be cheap.
