GT Sport DLC

[Tassie_tiger]

The GT5 paint DLC was a shocker.

On the other side of the coin it did make gold chrome cars rarer.
Imagine if they were infinite use.

Silver lining and all that.

 

[dissectional1]

As bad as DLC on GT 5 was, at least it brought new cars that were actually real cars. In GT 6 some of the VGT's are actually interesting, but releasing a ton of fantasy cars when you had real ones being released by manufacturarers at the time like new generation of the Mustang, for example. Or even if you take what happened with the Aventador in consideration, we could have had the Huracan released for GT6... Instead we got VGT's (some more outrageous than others)

 

[Johnnypenso]

The GT5 paint DLC was a shocker.

On the other side of the coin it did make gold chrome cars rarer.
Imagine if they were infinite use.

Silver lining and all that.

Only for those that didn't know how to use the game save glitch

 

[Oyashiro-sama]

You paid for (and received) the full game's online experience. The track DLC is additional: being able to play on those tracks is not a given.

Okay. But in the limit, if they added more 10 DLC tracks, online would be totally unforgivable and unplayable for people who didn't buy them, would it not? It's not fair, as it ruins something you payed for. It is no longer OPTIONAL content if it ruins the game experience. Cars are different, but tracks create a very complicated situation.

(Especially when you take in consideration that changing rooms is really slow, may freeze the game, and it's so hard to find a decent room/settings and you have to wait for the ongoing race to end... it's a nightmare. I wish PD would let us go alone to the selected track for a free run while waiting for the real race to finish)

 

[Imari]

But in the limit, if they added more 10 DLC tracks, online would be totally unforgivable and unplayable for people who didn't buy them, would it not?

Not really, no. I mean, there's way more than 10 iRacing tracks that I don't own and that's totally playable. I only owned the basic content to start with and that was totally playable.

Whether or not DLC makes the online into a nightmare is largely up to how the online is structured. If it's only public lobbies like GT5, that could be tough if everyone wants to play with the new content (although you could always set up your own room). In something like GT6 it could be tough again, but there's always some base content tracks in Quick Match.

Depending on how the GTS online is structured it could be anywhere from totally unplayable (they change all online tracks to be only the DLC ones) to completely inconsequential (they have a range of populated rooms with both base content and DLC tracks).

I think you're making a big fuss over something that may not be a problem.

 

[MarchingSaint]

Not really, no. I mean, there's way more than 10 iRacing tracks that I don't own and that's totally playable. I only owned the basic content to start with and that was totally playable.

Maybe iRacing is well balanced with what has the vanilla game to offer and what the dlc is.
If gt comes out with 10 tracks and PD then releases 5+ new tracks as DLC that is just unbalanced

I think you're making a big fuss over something that may not be a problem.

This.

 

[Donnced]

Okay. But in the limit, if they added more 10 DLC tracks, online would be totally unforgivable and unplayable for people who didn't buy them, would it not? It's not fair, as it ruins something you payed for. It is no longer OPTIONAL content if it ruins the game experience. Cars are different, but tracks create a very complicated situation.

Well... Got very easy solution!
In Project CARS if the person who opens a online lobby with a track of a DLC, allows all the people in the lobby to play on that track.

So,even you don't get a track or car DLC, you can play with them if the person who opened the lobby got them.

Sometimes in Project CARS before buying a track expansion i get into a online lobby whose playing with that new content, giving it a try and if i liked it, then finally buyed it.

A good thing about the DLC in that game was that you also receive an invitational championship with every DLC in the offline career mode.

GT easily could make a similar system.

 

[Yarf]

My guess is that we'll probably get a bunch of cars and new track every 2-6 months.

 

[jubeiiiii246]

I disagree for paid dlc. Free dlc? Maybe but pd should just put everything all tracks and cars and maybe add new cars in updates and tracks as well like in GT6. But when the game releases no dlc at first. But please pd wish lost for cars add more gt3! Add the viper gt3,Lamborghini gt3 huracan. lexus rcf gt3 lexus lfa gt3,Porsche 911 gt3,Mercedes Benz GT AMG gt3,bmw m4 gt3,Acura nsx gt3 or honda, jaguar xkr-s Gt4 if there is one,mclaren mp4-12c gt3, ford gt 2006 gt3, ford gt new gt3, mclaren p1 gtr etc. I will think of more later

 

[Johnnypenso]

I disagree for paid dlc. Free dlc? Maybe but pd should just put everything all tracks and cars and maybe add new cars in updates and tracks as well like in GT6. But when the game releases no dlc at first. But please pd wish lost for cars add more gt3! Add the viper gt3,Lamborghini gt3 huracan. lexus rcf gt3 lexus lfa gt3,Porsche 911 gt3,Mercedes Benz GT AMG gt3,bmw m4 gt3,Acura nsx gt3 or honda, jaguar xkr-s Gt4 if there is one,mclaren mp4-12c gt3, ford gt 2006 gt3, ford gt new gt3, mclaren p1 gtr etc. I will think of more later

So you want them to spend tons and tons of money and dedicate 1000's of man hours to making new cars but you don't want to pay for them?

 

[Toblakai99]

I would be shocked if there is no dlc in this day and age.

 

[ASH32]

So you want them to spend tons and tons of money and dedicate 1000's of man hours to making new cars but you don't want to pay for them?

Doesn't everybody. Not that this will ever happen of course.

Maybe they should go the route some other games are taking these days and just sell in game credits for real money, people are so lazy and/or just don't have the time to grind, that they sell like hot cakes. This allows most people to get the odd thing for free thanks to those who buy tons and tons of credits. Of course they'd then have to make sure there are no credit glitches so maybe this isn't the best solution for PD after all.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Okay. But in the limit, if they added more 10 DLC tracks, online would be totally unforgivable and unplayable for people who didn't buy them, would it not? It's not fair, as it ruins something you payed for. It is no longer OPTIONAL content if it ruins the game experience. Cars are different, but tracks create a very complicated situation.

(Especially when you take in consideration that changing rooms is really slow, may freeze the game, and it's so hard to find a decent room/settings and you have to wait for the ongoing race to end... it's a nightmare. I wish PD would let us go alone to the selected track for a free run while waiting for the real race to finish)

We've now graduated to a hypothetical what-if situation specifically designed to reinforce your point. I don't see a reason to continue the discussion, then.

 

[MisterWaffles]

INB4 bring back PS2-era tracks in free patches rants.

 

[Brutaka]

Im not believing anything PD or anyone says about DLC because what they say always comes back to bite them. That being said, I think the way DLC was handled in GT6 was alright. We got a lot of new features, a decent amount of cars (most VGT but oh well), two tracks, and it wasn't so much content that it seemed like they were withholding it in order to say that they have DLC.

 

[Imari]

Maybe iRacing is well balanced with what has the vanilla game to offer and what the dlc is.
If gt comes out with 10 tracks and PD then releases 5+ new tracks as DLC that is just unbalanced

Unbalanced yes, but the point that I was trying to make is that is doesn't necessarily break the game.

Maybe they should go the route some other games are taking these days and just sell in game credits for real money, people are so lazy and/or just don't have the time to grind, that they sell like hot cakes. This allows most people to get the odd thing for free thanks to those who buy tons and tons of credits. Of course they'd then have to make sure there are no credit glitches so maybe this isn't the best solution for PD after all.

I think this is the worst form of DLC. I'm totally OK with paying for content. Paying for credits just leads too easily to situations where the economy is designed to be grindy AF. That's fine in a F2P, that's their revenue model, but an economy in a purchased game should be designed to maximise the reward felt for the time invested. Not to be right on the edge of irritation so that the player considers spending even MORE money.

 

[MisterWaffles]

Unbalanced yes, but the point that I was trying to make is that is doesn't necessarily break the game.



I think this is the worst form of DLC. I'm totally OK with paying for content. Paying for credits just leads too easily to situations where the economy is designed to be grindy AF. That's fine in a F2P, that's their revenue model, but an economy in a purchased game should be designed to maximise the reward felt for the time invested. Not to be right on the edge of irritation so that the player considers spending even MORE money.

They tried doing the grind or pay real money thing in GT6, they learned from their mistake and patched the economy to allow for more credits to be won after a race. I doubt PD would go down that road again after the backlash from micro transactions in GT6.

 

[JoshDevil]

DLC?
What do we expect?

I anticipate there will be some.
Paid or free ... no clue.
(I suspect VGT's to be free)

Yes, I know the Vision project didn't fulfill during GT6.
But there are still 10 (maybe 11 if Honda re-emerge) VGT's sitting in the wings.

In that respect I expect DLC for GT Sport.
So do we expect them?
Do we expect more?

I guess those questions come down to how far away is GT7.
And will they hold off on DLC for that?

Anyway, I know it's a tough call with many details of GT Sport still up in the air.
But still ...
Cars?
Tracks?

I wake up every morning and pray that Kaz will add Pikes Peak

 

[super_gt]

This is an excellent news,I bought all GT6 DLC now is GT:S turn.👍

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

I enjoy FM6's DLC very much, don't ge tme wrong, but I'm still sitting here wondering what the heck is wrong with including all the content you aim to include on day one rather than forcing people to pay $60 up front for a product that's intentionally incomplete, and then possibly hundreds more if they want to get all the DLC.

 

[ImaRobot]

I enjoy FM6's DLC very much, don't ge tme wrong, but I'm still sitting here wondering what the heck is wrong with including all the content you aim to include on day one rather than forcing people to pay $60 up front for a product that's intentionally incomplete, and then possibly hundreds more if they want to get all the DLC.

Because in order to do that, you'd have to delay a game endlessly with no accurate date in sight. Games have deadlines. However, I think your implication that a game is incomplete because DLC is offered is completely wrong. Forza shipping with hundreds of cars is incomplete because they decide that they want to offer monthly car packs? That just doesn't make sense to me. The game was pretty damn full if you ask me.

I'd rather they make a good grounding, and focus resources on other parts of the game that way we have a good focused, and optimized game. After that, they can move back into releasing more cars after the game releases.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Because in order to do that, you'd have to delay a game endlessly with no accurate date in sight. Games have deadlines. However, I think your implication that a game is incomplete because DLC is offered is completely wrong. Forza shipping with hundreds of cars is incomplete because they decide that they want to offer monthly car packs? That just doesn't make sense to me. The game was pretty damn full if you ask me.

I'd rather they make a good grounding, and focus resources on other parts of the game that way we have a good focused, and optimized game. After that, they can move back into releasing more cars after the game releases.

Really? Because last I checked, before the idea of DLC came along it used to be very much possible for a dev to include all the content they wanted in the base game and still, more often than not, meet their projected deadlines.

 

[Imari]

I enjoy FM6's DLC very much, don't ge tme wrong, but I'm still sitting here wondering what the heck is wrong with including all the content you aim to include on day one rather than forcing people to pay $60 up front for a product that's intentionally incomplete, and then possibly hundreds more if they want to get all the DLC.

Firstly, all DLC is not necessarily complete at release.

Secondly, you can look at it the other way. They build a product that they think is worth the $60 asking price. Additional content over and above that is sold separately. Not unlike how automobiles are made, there is a base model that the manufacturer judges to be the minimum viable product, and then there are optional extras that cost money. It's a solid pricing scheme that works across many industries. Except with games people tend to get this sense of entitlement that because the content is digital and therefore costs nothing to copy they should be given it for free.

 

[ImaRobot]

Really? Because last I checked, before the idea of DLC came along it used to be very much possible for a dev to include all the content they wanted in the base game and still, more often than not, meet their projected deadlines.

And when was the last time you checked? Expansions(which in other words, works the same as DLC) have been a part of the gaming community since as long as I remember playing games.

They having a deadline means that they will likely not be able to include every single thing they want that they have on the drawing board. What you got when the game released you'd have no idea other way if it was all that was planned or not. How would you be able to tell? Meeting a deadline does not mean that they got everything in the game that they wanted.

However, that does not explain in any way that Forza is incomplete because it offers DLC after release. Care to elaborate?

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

And when was the last time you checked? Expansions(which in other words, DLC) have been a part of the gaming community since as long as I remember playing games.

To clarify, I was referring to games mostly before the dawn of the PS3/360 era. While expansions were somewhat common then, they were mostly limited to PC, and the vast majority of games from that time never got official expansions.

They having a deadline means that they will likely not be able to include every single thing they want that they have on the drawing board. What you got when the game released you'd have no idea other way if it was all that was planned or not. How would you be able to tell? Meeting a deadline does not mean that they got everything in the game that they wanted.

Better question: would it matter to you? Because it used to be that as long as a game felt complete on release, you'd never know and you'd just be happy with what you had.

However, that does not explain in any way that Forza is incomplete because it offers DLC after release. Care to elaborate?

Hmm, how should I say this?

I guess, looking back, I'm not against all DLC, and if it's good content, sure, I'll pay for it. However, if a dev has the ability to include given content in the basic game and chooses instead to hold it off until after release, then that inherently makes the game incomplete to me, as it's not the full experience the devs intended for the players, and this includes not only day-one DLC, but also content that was ready to be included in the game when it shipped but instead was held back a few months.

But really I just wonder what's happened to being fine with what you have on release. It seems to me like all players want these days is more, more, more. It's a sad reflection of society today.

 

[Terronium-12]

I enjoy FM6's DLC very much, don't ge tme wrong, but I'm still sitting here wondering what the heck is wrong with including all the content you aim to include on day one rather than forcing people to pay $60 up front for a product that's intentionally incomplete, and then possibly hundreds more if they want to get all the DLC.

Allow me to chime in, considering I have experience with how DLC works thanks to my involvement in a certain other game.

"A product that's intentionally incomplete.." is a very irrational way of coming to the conclusion that you're attempting to argue. There are a number of reasons why content is "withheld" (read: it isn't), and those reasons can be anything from licensing bouts, the models can't be worked on or completed until the shipped game is completed - that is, the game marketed as being full-featured at the time of release, or even, and this is really the thing that'll get quite a few people, the content can't be released before the timeline agreed to between the developer and the lawyers of whatever manufacturer it is.

It isn't as black and white as "well this was obviously completed before the game shipped, otherwise how could DLC begin a month after release?"

The Centenario might be a perfect example of the latter reasoning because while it was announced some time ago, it likely can't appear anytime before the next Forza game is released. Could it have been seen in Forza 6? Perhaps, but without knowing the details of the negotiations it isn't anything but conjecture. Hell, what I just said is conjecture.

 

[ImaRobot]

To clarify, I was referring to games mostly before the dawn of the PS3/360 era. While expansions were somewhat common then, they were mostly limited to PC, and the vast majority of games from that time never got official expansions.

Either way, how would you know if they where complete or not? When it released, that's all their going to be able to do until the next game, where they likely will throw in the idea's that they didn't get to use in the first place. How are you able to judge if a game is complete or not otherwise?

Better question: would it matter to you? Because it used to be that as long as a game felt complete on release, you'd never know and you'd just be happy with what you had.

You're the one bringing up the situation, so you should be asking yourself the question. However, if feel like you're completely contradicting yourself with the second sentence. Forza feels complete, but because there are cars added after release, that somehow means its not complete now? If they didn't give us any info about a DLC plan, then you wouldn't be here thinking about how a game was incomplete, you would have accepted it as a full game. DLC does not mean a game is incomplete.

Hmm, how should I say this?

I guess, looking back, I'm not against all DLC, and if it's good content, sure, I'll pay for it. However, if a dev has the ability to include given content in the basic game and chooses instead to hold it off until after release, then that inherently makes the game incomplete to me, as it's not the full experience the devs intended for the players, and this includes not only day-one DLC, but also content that was ready to be included in the game when it shipped but instead was held back a few months.

Please, do tell me, what content was held back? I'm sure you have access to all their work schedule and planning to be able to make such a claim, right? How are you able to judge what has been held back in order to profit from it at a later date?

But really I just wonder what's happened to being fine with what you have on release. It seems to me like all players want these days is more, more, more. It's a sad reflection of society today.

Odd thing to say since you are the one making a big deal about what was released and not being fine with it and implying that its not a complete game, because of the inclusion of DLC.

 

[willbsn13]

However, if a dev has the ability to include given content in the basic game and chooses instead to hold it off until after release, then that inherently makes the game incomplete to me
.

You have literally have no way a proving that game devs do this. How do you tell?

 

[TexasTyme214]

Well... Got very easy solution!
In Project CARS if the person who opens a online lobby with a track of a DLC, allows all the people in the lobby to play on that track.

So,even you don't get a track or car DLC, you can play with them if the person who opened the lobby got them.

Sometimes in Project CARS before buying a track expansion i get into a online lobby whose playing with that new content, giving it a try and if i liked it, then finally buyed it.

A good thing about the DLC in that game was that you also receive an invitational championship with every DLC in the offline career mode.

GT easily could make a similar system.

I love this idea, buy iirc, PD used to to this with GT5 and stopped it in a patch a little after the time Spa was released. I think it's a little better with Pcars since you received more for your money when it came to DLC in GT5. I'd love to see PD do this again.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Either way, how would you know if they where complete or not? When it released, that's all their going to be able to do until the next game, where they likely will throw in the idea's that they didn't get to use in the first place. How are you able to judge if a game is complete or not otherwise?


You're the one bringing up the situation, so you should be asking yourself the question. However, if feel like you're completely contradicting yourself with the second sentence. Forza feels complete, but because there are cars added after release, that somehow means its not complete now? If they didn't give us any info about a DLC plan, then you wouldn't be here thinking about how a game was incomplete, you would have accepted it as a full game. DLC does not mean a game is incomplete.


Please, do tell me, what content was held back? I'm sure you have access to all their work schedule and planning to be able to make such a claim, right? How are you able to judge what has been held back in order to profit from it at a later date?


Odd thing to say since you are the one making a big deal about what was released and not being fine with it and implying that its not a complete game, because of the inclusion of DLC.

IDK what to say. It seems, yet again, I've backed myself into a corner I can't get out of.

I still have no idea why I'm even actively participating in this forum anymore when I'm never right.