Gran Turismo 7's Microtransaction Pricing Revealed

  • Thread starter Famine
  • 436 comments
  • 31,040 views
Microtransactions are never OK in a AAA game that we pay 103 CAD after taxes for the basic version. Get that stuff out of Gran Turismo, its not a free to play game.
The only case I’m ok with MTX is in free to play games for cosmetic stuff only. Thats probably a Sony move to try to get more money out of us, I doubt PD is behind that.

Lets just hope that the in game economy is like GT6 and Sport where you absolutely didnt need to buy that crap.
 
As long as MTX don't provide a competitive edge over other players (i.e non-p2w) - i'm all for it. In GT7 it doesn't. Many categorical anti-MTXers here either seem to ignore or fail to realize that bigger revenue for Polyphony has a direct net-positive ripple effect for the longevity of the game.
So a net postive is future games having an economy thats even slower and even grindier where you'll be forced to stump up even more to avoid missing out?
 
Microtransactions are never OK in a AAA game that we pay 103 CAD after taxes for the basic version. Get that stuff out of Gran Turismo, its not a free to play game.
The only case I’m ok with MTX is in free to play games for cosmetic stuff only. Thats probably a Sony move to try to get more money out of us, I doubt PD is behind that.

Lets just hope that the in game economy is like GT6 and Sport where you absolutely didnt need to buy that crap.
Sorry to break it to you but the economy in GT7 is absolutely horrendous. 100,000 to buy NOS. 8000 for a muffler. The price are design to incentivize micro transaction
 
In GT7 it doesn't. Many categorical anti-MTXers here either seem to ignore or fail to realize that bigger revenue for Polyphony has a direct net-positive ripple effect for the longevity of the game.
Oh come on. GT7 could sell a hundred copies and they'd be still supporting the game for two plus years, because of the position Polyphony holds within the Sony first party hierarchy, and of the name that is on the box.

The same actions Sony took against Evolution for perceived failures (which often times weren't their fault) would never be done with Polyphony or GT, no matter what.
 
Remember that time in GT5 where the originally intended plan for paint chips were for them to be one-time use only, and any and all subsequent uses needed to be paid for? Of course it was quickly overturned because they got an earful and a half, but let's not pretend PD won't do whatever they can get away with.

Whistles innocently

"You want all of them? If you insist..." Waits a half hour for them to load.
 
I don't even understand why the slow progression is a thing to begin with. I've been saying this for sometime now, but GT stopped being a game ages ago.
I mean, there's a fine line between the progression of say, Forza Horizon (which admittedly isn't great, but at the very least you can get most of the cars that you want, and there's a chance of getting high end vehicles without much grinding, though coming down to luck more then anything else) and what GT seems to be doing since Sport specifically. But it's clear that what Polyphony is doing now with the past two games, and especially now, is incredibly worrying and with the continued insistence on micro-transactions, going by their recent history as well, it certainly doesn't bode well for the general gameplay loop either.
 
My 2c, and I now nothing.

Microtransactions aren't the problem. Ridiculously over-priced virtual assets are the problem.

Pure greed.
Wrong. Micro transactions are indeed a problem. Over-priced virtual assets is arguably a problem too, sure, but doesn’t have to be. Just make it easier to earn credits and the problem is gone.

I don’t have the game yet, but this pretty much confirms that we still can’t sell gift cars and that there’s still a 20 million credit cap, right?
 
Last edited:
These prices are ridiculous. I have nothing against MTX, but I strongly dislike them when they have a direct impact on the game balance (pay 2 win). If they force people to grind to unbearable levels, that's really disappointing.

Having said that I have an honest question for people who are fundamentally opposed to MTX. What alternatives exist for studios and developers to run a profitable business and keep developing and supporting a game, when the AAA development budgets today are in the hundreds of millions of dollars and games take years to be developed by hundreds of people who need to be paid? These are no longer the days when a game went out to the market and got forgotten. We as players expect games to be patched and supported for years, yet we expect to pay only once as we did 15 or 20 or 30 years ago? Something's gotta give

With budgets being so high, it's almost impossible to break even just by selling copies of the game, especially if the game is to be supported into the future. Developers have to have a way of monetizing their work.
 
Wow, this is horrible. They’ve gone full Rockstar Games. Making us either grind or pay for cars with real money is.. just bad, really freaking bad.
It's bold to complain about grinding, considering it's been the flow of gameplay from the very beginning.
 
If a game is free or very cheap, MTs make sense. Maybe. For a game this expensive and selling in so big a volume worldwide, often to be played by kids (MTs for adult content in adult games might make sense) they’re a pretty shameless and exploitative money grab. Especially at this ‘exchange rate’ for in-game credits. I’d never fall for it, but a younger me might have. And a very young me would’ve definitely pestered mum and dad to get the purse out. Having said that, they’re here and unlikely to be going away.

If you play GT like me, in moderation, a few hours a day a few days a week, over time the credits accumulate and over the course of a year or so you’re bit-by-bit able to buy and enjoy all the things you want. That’s me with Sport, all the unicorns I wanted, just doing the races I liked in the cars I liked over and over, enjoying it. Or I would’ve stopped.

However, if you’re in a rush and want it all ASAP, I can see there might be pressure to find ‘profitable’ races to grind. Should it be easier (ie cheaper cars/higher prize monies)? I dunno. I can only say I enjoy playing my way and never really felt anything cost too much or was too much effort in GTS. Perhaps I’m an outlier.

But avoid MTs in already expensive games. It’s the only way to break the model if you don’t agree with them.
 
These prices are ridiculous. I have nothing against MTX, but I strongly dislike them when they have a direct impact on the game balance (pay 2 win). If they force people to grind to unbearable levels, that's really disappointing.

Having said that I have an honest question for people who are fundamentally opposed to MTX. What alternatives exist for studios and developers to run a profitable business and keep developing and supporting a game, when the AAA development budgets today are in the hundreds of millions of dollars and games take years to be developed by hundreds of people who need to be paid? These are no longer the days when a game went out to the market and got forgotten. We as players expect games to be patched and supported for years, yet we expect to pay only once as we did 15 or 20 or 30 years ago? Something's gotta give

With budgets being so high, it's almost impossible to break even just by selling copies of the game, especially if the game is to be supported into the future. Developers have to have a way of monetizing their work.
Straightforward paid DLC, still works perfectly well, and developers (AAA or otherwise) still manage to run profitable businesses without the need to resort to MTs.

The real issue here is that PD doesn't need to do it with GT, it's a literal Halo product, and Sony would support it even if it did make a loss.
 
I would however happily pay for new DLC content like the Lewis Hamilton DLC in GT Sport, which upon completion of those challenges awarded 100M+ credits, which was enough to allow me to finish the car collection in that game. That said, any such DLC should be easier than that was to complete :lol:
Is that 100m credits correct? Was that DLC essentially a pathway to huge credits with a relatively reasonable amount of work?

If so, them c'mon PD, offer us a GT7 dlc with the same huge credit option :)
 
Having said that I have an honest question for people who are fundamentally opposed to MTX. What alternatives exist for studios and developers to run a profitable business and keep developing and supporting a game, when the AAA development budgets today are in the hundreds of millions of dollars and games take years to be developed by hundreds of people who need to be paid?
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in some time.

They charge $70 for the standard version of the game, and it will sell millions of copies. How’s that not enough?
 
It's bold to complain about grinding, considering it's been the flow of gameplay from the very beginning.
Once you get past GT4, the grind has gotten significantly worse.

Keep in mind that prices per car have increased (particularly the top tier), limits on the wallet have been put in place, race prize money and cars have reduced (or been removed), the daily prize wheel is biased against high-value cars, the inability to sell prize cars, and so on.

In GT4 the most expensive cars were Cr4.5m and only six of them in the entire car list, a number of which could also be either bought second hand or won as prize cars.

It's been fairly clear for a while that the in-game economy for the series has gotten worse.
 
Last edited:
Straightforward paid DLC, still works perfectly well, and developers (AAA or otherwise) still manage to run profitable businesses without the need to resort to MTs.

The real issue here is that PD doesn't need to do it with GT, it's a literal Halo product, and Sony would support it even if it did make a loss.
I agree with Paid DLC. However, developing DLC also costs money, so prices would not be $1 a car or $3 a track. I wouldn't be surprised seeing people's outrage if Polyphony announced that they would have Paid DLC at $10 a track or for $10 for a three car pack. It's sad but many people expect to get years of support and ongoing free content for $60. Numbers just don't add up if that's what we want
 
I also think that the MT‘s itself aren’t the problem, for me they were ok in GT Sport, but the pricing here for GT7 isn’t nice. (But have to mention I haven’t played the game yet)
But for all the critics here who immediately damn PD as a evil company or something, remember that all DLC in Sport was for free, all the great cars, all the tracks, except the one DLC with Hamilton at the end.
That shouldn’t be taken for granted when compared to other racing games and I guess they will do it the same way with GT7.

And I for myself prefer an economy of a GT, where cars really feel as something special, over for example Forza Horizons, where you get car after car, can’t even drive them all and don’t feel any special or earned.

And can someone answer: Are there reward cars for the daily workout again and is there a function to transfer cars to others a gift? (Would be important regarding the MTs)
 
Last edited:
These prices are ridiculous. I have nothing against MTX, but I strongly dislike them when they have a direct impact on the game balance (pay 2 win). If they force people to grind to unbearable levels, that's really disappointing.

Having said that I have an honest question for people who are fundamentally opposed to MTX. What alternatives exist for studios and developers to run a profitable business and keep developing and supporting a game, when the AAA development budgets today are in the hundreds of millions of dollars and games take years to be developed by hundreds of people who need to be paid? These are no longer the days when a game went out to the market and got forgotten. We as players expect games to be patched and supported for years, yet we expect to pay only once as we did 15 or 20 or 30 years ago? Something's gotta give

With budgets being so high, it's almost impossible to break even just by selling copies of the game, especially if the game is to be supported into the future. Developers have to have a way of monetizing their work.
The question is how big is the skim? once costs are covered. Capitalism is ruthless.
 
The real issue here is that PD doesn't need to do it with GT, it's a literal Halo product, and Sony would support it even if it did make a loss.
Bolded cuts right to the heart of the problem. There is simply no need to do microtransactions to the level, and to the amount, that Polyphony have done since GT5, really. And it's utterly hilarious to me that people try the tactic of pleading to Polyphony's poverty, when they are nowhere close, in terms of profits or especially power.
 
So for Ferrari 250 GTO i need to pay like 165 dollars?
No.

If you want to buy credits in order to buy it, yes... but also no, because that's the microtransactions price from GT6, not GT7.

Whatever the price, you are not forced to buy credits for cash to buy things in GT7, so your take that it's "fraud" is - and this appears to be entirely in character - the most absolutely insane over-the-top over-reaction, and by far the worst single take expressed anywhere by anyone. Again.


The real problem here is if the game is designed specifically to make credits more scarce, to make earning money a tedious task in order to make buying credits a more tempting, quick solution. That would be heinous... but nobody's got far enough into the game yet to fully flesh out how easy or difficult it is to earn money.

In GT6 PD seemed to entirely circumvent it by throwing cash at you for seasonal events (which are supposedly coming to GT7 also). In GT Sport, earning money was torture, but you also couldn't buy it.

If money is easy to come by and you get the option to buy it if you can't be bothered... that's kind of okay but still feels really greasy. If money is articifically difficult to come by, leaving only the options of grind like hell for hours or buy it, that's awful and should be pilloried.


Crying "fraud" because you added up some numbers is bonkers.
 
With budgets being so high, it's almost impossible to break even just by selling copies of the game, especially if the game is to be supported into the future. Developers have to have a way of monetizing their work.
This is a fair point but the problem is that too many companies trot this out while exploiting it for pure profit so it shouldn't be any surprise that the opinion of it is generally soured.

Is it Madden that made almost a billion dollars from pack sales alone yet they came out and said they couldn't afford the work needed to add referee models back into their simulation football title.

These kinds of stories are always going to grab press and anger consumers, making any thought of microtransactions toxic even if done in a relatively productive manner.
 
The question is how big is the skim? once costs are covered. Capitalism is ruthless.
Definitely, I agree with you. I want to give PD the benefit of the doubt. At the end of the day they supported GT Sport for 5 years for free and added tons of content. This is not EA squeezing every possible cent out of players with loot mechanics. As long as it's not insanely difficult to grind 20M credits, it remains a choice, an unpleasant one though.

A good example of DLC that I'm more than happy to pay for is Assetto Corsa Competizione's on PC or Automobilista 2 DLC.

These are small studios that are not making millions upon millions from their content. They run a good business that pays their developers well and they deliver an excellent product without being predatory.
 
Last edited:
The question is how big is the skim? once costs are covered. Capitalism is ruthless.
Your last statement is purely the problem.. and as I said before this is every company. If this was forced on players I would be upset.. this mental warfare on gammers dealing with MTs I’m sorry I don’t buy it.. if I want it I will get it if I don’t I won’t..
 
It's somewhat confusing that they've decided to go this way, because PD could have easily monetized cosmetic tuning. Anything that doesn't affect PP balance in game they could've monetized around and I'm sure they would make decent money. That would remain completely optional and there are more than enough people who would pay for wheels, or decals or stuff like that just like people spend money in shooters for gun skins or character skins.
 
Oof, those are Rockstar level on terms of bad. Probably going to be made worse if PD decides all the DLC requires money as well (where as Rockstar releases all its DLC for free b/c they make so much more money on MXTs people spend to grab that content).

Edit* PD's DLC gives you the car for free in your garage, right? Might not be so bad, if so, actually.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Paid DLC. However, developing DLC also costs money, so prices would not be $1 a car or $3 a track. I wouldn't be surprised seeing people's outrage if Polyphony announced that they would have Paid DLC at $10 a track or for $10 for a three car pack. It's sad but many people expect to get years of support and ongoing free content for $60. Numbers just don't add up if that's what we want
Once again, PD doesn't have to make a profit, and to be honest if Reiza can sell Automobilista 2 DLC for £10.99 which includes 3 tracks and 4 cars, then PD and Sony certainly can.

Edit* PD's DLC gives you the car for free in your garage, right? Might not be so bad, if so, actually.
Nope, you still have to buy it in-game, at least you did in GTS, if they keep that model.
 
Last edited:
Ignoring them doesn't magically change the game economy. If they've set that up around pushing people towards MTs then it's going to affect everyone trying to earn enough credits.
Reviews suggest this isn't the case, and even less so than the classic GT method of grinding for hours to afford a Mustang.

Ultimately, it's up to people and their good discipline to avoid shelling out cash and giving precedent to the microtransactions. Having the option to turn them off seems like a good-faith effort on the part of PD.
 
Back