So now we can "bribe our way to victory"? (PRICES REVEALED, SEE OP)

[nickg07]

Guys let's be honest, seasonal payouts made GT5 accessible in terms of payouts and experience. If seasonals get nerfed or similar then PD have sold us out in a cash for credits guise.

 

[machschnel]

A good compromised solution that was put forth, was to have arcade cars unlocked by default, and to allow players to compete online within arcade mode. The GT mode would remain, but those who don't have time can still enjoy the game, everyone would've been happy. Their actual solution only satifies those who have more money than time.

This was the path I hoped Polyphony would take. It says a lot about them (or perhaps Sony) that they chose to essentially charge twice for game content rather than the alternative you described above. I really do agree it would have kept everyone happy.

But when the core content of the game can be bought with real world cash, then we have a problem. They could have simply opened up access to those cars from the beginning, or allowed users to share gamesaves so that they didn't need to grind. There were other, better solutions to this money grabbing farce.

Exactly.

If people not having time to unlock content is the problem, making them pay more money is not the solution. It really does beg the question of what content you're actually buying when you purchase GT6.

 

[dmcallis]

Guys let's be honest, seasonal payouts made GT5 accessible in terms of payouts and experience. If seasonals get nerfed or similar then PD have sold us out in a cash for credits guise.

Either that or it means they came to their senses with those ridiculous payouts...

 

[Bluntified]

Either that or it means they came to their senses with those ridiculous payouts...

I think they gave us those payout to give new comers (and people without time) a chance to catch up and actually get to level 40/gain money. Those payouts with the PP difference bonuses didn't come till nearly 2 years after the game came out.

 

[Vivi22]

This was the path I hoped Polyphony would take. It says a lot about them (or perhaps Sony) that they chose to essentially charge twice for game content rather than the alternative you described above. I really do agree it would have kept everyone happy.




Exactly.

If people not having time to unlock content is the problem, making them pay more money is not the solution. It really does beg the question of what content you're actually buying when you purchase GT6.

I never cease to be amazed at how much people complain about things that don't affect them if they don't want to pay the money.

 

[Bluntified]

I never cease to be amazed at how much people complain about things that don't affect them if they don't want to pay the money.

I'm not sure people are solely complaining about "things that don't affect them". It's more of the principle, if PD/game devs get huge payouts from this type of crap, this will end "full" games as we know it. Everything will lean towards "iPad/Android" games, where you pay for every little thing.

You think this is right? Wait a few years where you're paying $120 for A game! We get "demos" for $60 then buy the rest in-game.

I am against in game purchases early in the games life!! To me DLC or anything, should be added at least a year later, to keep the game still fresh and relevant. Paying money to gain "money", what the heck is that? You have to think of the long run, we pay that now, think of how much we'll "HAVE TO" pay later - when in-game payouts start decreasing and item prices start rising!

It's all about the reception the receive for it, GTPL is only a small fraction of the user base.

 

[Bowtie-muscle]

I believe that being ALLOWED to buy credits is for those who want a jump start, not to fix a bad in game economy. Not all of us get to play super-oober hours worth each week, buying credits will slow down grinding. If you have a problem with it, simply don't buy it. Has been said a million times already about every DLC. Although Bluntified does make a good point.

 

[Bluntified]

I believe that being ALLOWED to buy credits is for those who want a jump start, not to fix a bad in game economy. Not all of us get to play super-oober hours worth each week, buying credits will slow down grinding. If you have a problem with it, simply don't buy it. Has been said a million times already about every DLC. Although Bluntified does make a good point.

Arcade mode should be perfect for those without time, no tuning needed no oil changes nothing, just pick a car and drive.

We've seen it in many "games", anyone every play Candy Crush Saga (as well as many other games? If you don't pay, you'll go no where fast! That's where this will lead future games.

 

[Bowtie-muscle]

Arcade mode should be perfect for those without time, no tuning needed no oil changes nothing, just pick a car and drive.

We've seen it in many "games", anyone every play Candy Crush Saga (as well as many other games? If you don't pay, you'll go no where fast! That's where this will lead future games.

You are correct mostly, that is part of why I gave up on the NFS series. You needed DLC. It should be kept as a CHOICE. Still think we have to wait and see how this plays out; how the payouts are, what are the prize cars and do we get to win them more than once like every OTHER GT title. IF buying credits is needed to really get anywhere in the game, I will be the first to stand up and admit I was wrong. Sadly though, if that happens it will be all too late for all of us. Lets hope PD doesn't make it a necessity.

 

[Vivi22]

I'm not sure people are solely complaining about "things that don't affect them". It's more of the principle, if PD/game devs get huge payouts from this type of crap, this will end "full" games as we know it. Everything will lean towards "iPad/Android" games, where you pay for every little thing.

You think this is right? Wait a few years where you're paying $120 for A game! We get "demos" for $60 then buy the rest in-game.

I am against in game purchases early in the games life!! To me DLC or anything, should be added at least a year later, to keep the game still fresh and relevant. Paying money to gain "money", what the heck is that? You have to think of the long run, we pay that now, think of how much we'll "HAVE TO" pay later - when in-game payouts start decreasing and item prices start rising!

It's all about the reception the receive for it, GTPL is only a small fraction of the user base.

I strongly doubt any of that will ever happen, largely because a large segment of gamers would never go with it. So until it actually happens I'm not going to get my panties in a twist over baseless alarmism.

 

[machschnel]

I never cease to be amazed at how much people complain about things that don't affect them if they don't want to pay the money.

Firstly, we haven't seen how the GT6 economy is structured. Could be that everyone is "affected".

Secondly, I have zero problem with a well designed credit system.

Lastly, you mention it's not a problem if you "don't want to pay the money". Sorry, but we all pay money to buy the game in the first place. I've still yet to hear a legitimate reason why my initial purchase of GT6 doesn't entitle me to every car and track in the game, even if it's only in Arcade Mode.

 

[Bluntified]

I strongly doubt any of that will ever happen, largely because a large segment of gamers would never go with it. So until it actually happens I'm not going to get my panties in a twist over baseless alarmism.

It's already happened , PD is just late to the party! There was a boxing game for android that had a total cost of $100 from a free game. Would you pay that money for a game on your phone? I sure wouldn't. What's stopping them from doing this on a console based game, nothing.

Look at other console games, they require you to pay to keep competitive! You call it "getting my panties in a twist", I call it looking at reality!

Edit: I wanna see who these "large numbers" are, judging by this thread alone, it's still a close race!

Edit: Just because we might not see affects in GT6, with GT7 coming close behind, we could definitely see something then.

 

[FRoSTeD]

Provided content isn't made more difficult (or impossible) to obtain for the sake of microtransactions (ala Forza 5), I see no problems with giving an alternative to the grindfest of obtaining in-game credits.

 

[Tornado]

I strongly doubt any of that will ever happen, largely because a large segment of gamers would never go with it.

You mean the same large segment that when EA (among others) said "Jump" they lined up to ask "How high?"

 

[AOS-]

I'm down for the idea of paying to play. I don't have the patience to grind for high-priced cars, I barely enjoy racing and doing the events in Gran Turismo games, and I spend most of my time buying cars, painting it and equipping parts just to goof off for a short sitting.

And I don't even play online with others so the headaches you guys will have aren't a concern.

 

[ScouserInExile]

I never cease to be amazed at how much people complain about things that don't affect them if they don't want to pay the money.

The problem is that, in order to include microtransactions in any meaningful and useful way, the game has to be designed so that to not pay for these boosts will put the player at some for of disadvantage. The easiest way to do this in a game like GT is to make the grind erm... "grindier". Which means that, for those of us who "aren't affected" have an inferior gaming experience due to not paying.

I've read that Forza has a good example of this whereby, in order to get the "god car" Lotus F1, you can grind the top paying races for around 15 hours, or you can buy £50 worth of magic beans and get it immediately.

 

[Bowtie-muscle]

The problem is that, in order to include microtransactions in any meaningful and useful way, the game has to be designed so that to not pay for these boosts will put the player at some for of disadvantage. The easiest way to do this in a game like GT is to make the grind erm... "grindier". Which means that, for those of us who "aren't affected" have an inferior gaming experience due to not paying.

I've read that Forza has a good example of this whereby, in order to get the "god car" Lotus F1, you can grind the top paying races for around 15 hours, or you can buy £50 worth of magic beans and get it immediately.

Sadly, many would pay to fill there garage with cars they didn't earn. I for one, however, would NEVER pay for such a pile of "magic beans".

 

[RACECAR]

...or just don't buy them and move the least used of those that you do buy, into your storage parking lot.

There, I saved you some money!

And just like that, you solved the cash crisis.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Because PD works more and more to add to the game?

Once again if you read my comments clearly through you'd see I was merely explaining to Jonny and in general but if you want to debate it we can.

It is illogical to say its cheating imo. Having more credits doesn't give you skill. It doesn't change the PP limits of the events. All it does is allow more freedom in what you purchase. Wow. Not a big deal. Good for whoever wants to waste their money (my take) on credits for a video game. It doesn't affect my career in GT6, and online are limitations put in place. I can buy a racing suspension and whatever for my car too. You have to progress through the game with the star system. Until credits can buy you stars this is a non issue.

Yes but what you lack in depth to see is the slippery slope and the inflated method that it may be used, as other had clearly put forth, if it doesn't affect you that's awesome you get a gold star. However, some wonder how far PD plan to take this since this came out of the blue. Also

Also how do you know how the stars work when there hasn't been much definitive info that tells us exactly how GT life works. Could you point us in the direction of this?

I strongly doubt any of that will ever happen, largely because a large segment of gamers would never go with it. So until it actually happens I'm not going to get my panties in a twist over baseless alarmism.

Because it didn't happen before in the same industry, warning of day 1 DLC, massive patches to complete games or fix them as you go, DLC to complete games thus mandatory. Systems like this aren't implimented with the idea "oh it's to help the majority of players" business is more cut throat than that and there is enough from big groups to see how it could be a slope, but ignorance is bliss so...

 

[Predwolf]

I don't have any issues with this as long as there are good payouts in the upper-tier races. I have friends who don't play GT all that much anymore, and they stopped playing GT5 after a few months just because they couldn't get anywhere with how little they made. They couldn't devote 6+ hours a day to get the cash needed to buy the cars they wanted, let alone freely buy and mod cars like you used to be able to do.

So, if this gives people who are short on time the ability to enjoy the game as much as people who have plenty of free time, then I'm totally for it. Just as long as PD doesn't treat this like Grand Theft Auto Online and starts nerfing race payouts in order to promote cash cards.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Once again if you read my comments clearly through you'd see I was merely explaining to Jonny and in general but if you want to debate it we can.

Yes but what you lack in depth to see is the slippery slope and the inflated method that it may be used, as other had clearly put forth, if it doesn't affect you that's awesome you get a gold star. However, some wonder how far PD plan to take this since this came out of the blue. Also

Also how do you know how the stars work when there hasn't been much definitive info that tells us exactly how GT life works. Could you point us in the direction of this?

Because it didn't happen before in the same industry, warning of day 1 DLC, massive patches to complete games or fix them as you go, DLC to complete games thus mandatory. Systems like this aren't implimented with the idea "oh it's to help the majority of players" business is more cut throat than that and there is enough from big groups to see how it could be a slope, but ignorance is bliss so...

As I said, I have no problem with DLC, I think it's just the way things are now that we can actually download content, unlike GT 1-4. The alternative is no DLC and that's not the best option IMO. And if the event payouts aren't nerfed, I have no problem with the ability to buy credits either. But I think you're right, it's a slippery slope and can easily lead to reduced payouts and more expensive cars (on average) to encourage the purchase of credits and I do believe PD will test that route even if ever so slightly, to see what happens.

Thing for me is though, and I'm sure a lot of others, GT isn't the best sim around, but it is the most convenient, and the cheapest, with a wide variety of cars and tracks. Going from a $60-120 purchase with DLC is also fine for me. But if it begins to cost $200+ now other games will come into consideration, particularly PC sims, and of course PCars. If GT loses it's status as the cheapest game to play with a full slate of cars and tracks the buying decisions may change for me...and others. It's a slippery slope for PD..hopefully they play it right.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

As I said, I have no problem with DLC, I think it's just the way things are now that we can actually download content, unlike GT 1-4. The alternative is no DLC and that's not the best option IMO. And if the event payouts aren't nerfed, I have no problem with the ability to buy credits either. But I think you're right, it's a slippery slope and can easily lead to reduced payouts and more expensive cars (on average) to encourage the purchase of credits and I do believe PD will test that route even if ever so slightly, to see what happens.

Thing for me is though, and I'm sure a lot of others, GT isn't the best sim around, but it is the most convenient, and the cheapest, with a wide variety of cars and tracks. Going from a $60-120 purchase with DLC is also fine for me. But if it begins to cost $200+ now other games will come into consideration, particularly PC sims, and of course PCars. If GT loses it's status as the cheapest game to play with a full slate of cars and tracks the buying decisions may change for me...and others. It's a slippery slope for PD..hopefully they play it right.

Considering pCars will sale for the same price as GT this upcoming year, the fact that sims are free or have a subscription fee that is regularly discounted or you race and thus it saves you money. I don't see how GT is the cheapest, the most convenient sure, but not the cheapest especially with other console racers that are the same price, just probably don't have the car content. However, what they lack in car content they make up in immersion that PD has yet to do and also personalization.

I also don't have an issue with DLC or Credit purchases but for the latter I can see it having a diminishing return and the concern others have, however for now I have no reason to worry yet. My point is I'm just explaining to you and in general the shift in gaming that benefits the casual player or mass consumer still isn't liked and wont be liked for a while I'm sure, I never said I personally see it that way but there are plenty who still don't care for PD DLC.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Considering pCars will sale for the same price as GT this upcoming year, the fact that sims are free or have a subscription fee that is regularly discounted or you race and thus it saves you money. I don't see how GT is the cheapest, the most convenient sure, but not the cheapest especially with other console racers that are the same price, just probably don't have the car content. However, what they lack in car content they make up in immersion that PD has yet to do and also personalization.

I also don't have an issue with DLC or Credit purchases but for the latter I can see it having a diminishing return and the concern others have, however for now I have no reason to worry yet. My point is I'm just explaining to you and in general the shift in gaming that benefits the casual player or mass consumer still isn't liked and wont be liked for a while I'm sure, I never said I personally see it that way but there are plenty who still don't care for PD DLC.

I did say "cheapest with a wide variety of cars and tracks". Most of the F2P's I'm aware of have an extremely limited selection and it's not apples to apples. I paid maybe $100 to race 300 cars for 3 years. Try iRacing for 3 years, it's not $100...lol. The only comparable console racer is Forza and with 200 cars, 10 tracks and crappy payouts that almost force you into microtransactions it looks like it's already jumped the shark.

But as I said, as the price of GT creeps up, other sims might look more attractive.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I bet there will be a whole bunch of people who accuse PD of profiteering when the game is released and they don't have a 20 mil car within a day or two.

Once people think they are being hard done by, it's difficult to change their suspicious minds!

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I did say "cheapest with a wide variety of cars and tracks". Most of the F2P's I'm aware of have an extremely limited selection and it's not apples to apples. I paid maybe $100 to race 300 cars for 3 years. Try iRacing for 3 years, it's not $100...lol. The only comparable console racer is Forza and with 200 cars, 10 tracks and crappy payouts that almost force you into microtransactions it looks like it's already jumped the shark.

But as I said, as the price of GT creeps up, other sims might look more attractive.

And I did say all GT has is the cars to out weigh. Yet as proven on other GT6 threads PD aren't the only game with this many tracks iracing also has the same amount. It's fine if you think GT6 is the best option but reality wise that has yet to be seen.

 

[ScouserInExile]

Provided content isn't made more difficult (or impossible) to obtain for the sake of microtransactions (ala Forza 5), I see no problems with giving an alternative to the grindfest of obtaining in-game credits.

This is the crux of the problem, really. If it isn't at least a little bit more difficult to advance than in previous games, why the sudden inclusion of pay to win?

There has always been grind in GT games, especially when trying to get your second car, but you've always felt like you're getting somewhere. It would be very easy for pd to drop the rewards by 10 to 20 percent and suddenly people will feel the need to put their hands in their pockets to progress. Especially people like me who have very limited gaming time.

 

[exiledfrenchy]

And I did say all GT has is the cars to out weigh. Yet as proven on other GT6 threads PD aren't the only game with this many tracks iracing also has the same amount. It's fine if you think GT6 is the best option but reality wise that has yet to be seen.

I think Johnny has a point regarding the costs, if you take the cost of the system into consideration. It is a lot cheaper and more comfortable to get a PS3 and GT than a full fledged PC and iRacing, the subscription, cars and running costs. Granted,the experience is very different,depends on how much you are willing to spend for this hobby. The gap between the two is what PD and all the others are exploiting with microtransactions.
I agree that ut remains to be seen how much we will be "forced" to buy credits, but for now I still like the idea.
As for being relegated to "arcade only if you don't have time",i disagree strongly. I have little time,but i enjoy tuning,buying cars etc. just as much. Why would we be barred from that? That is the point,get around the grinding to enjoy the full game.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I think Johnny has a point regarding the costs, if you take the cost of the system into consideration. It is a lot cheaper and more comfortable to get a PS3 and GT than a full fledged PC and iRacing, the subscription, cars and running costs. Granted,the experience is very different,depends on how much you are willing to spend for this hobby. The gap between the two is what PD and all the others are exploiting with microtransactions.

Have you actually looked at the requirements or played even a trial of iRacing or at the very least gone to the thread here to see how you can obtain cars or get money from them that allows you to play, so long as you actually race on the game? As far as systems go I had the same question asked last time this was brought up, I bought my set up on black Friday last year and it runs several online games just fine and it was quite cheap and even outside that it's not incredibly expensive, you don't need an alienware system to play the game.

I agree that ut remains to be seen how much we will be "forced" to buy credits, but for now I still like the idea.
As for being relegated to "arcade only if you don't have time",i disagree strongly. I have little time,but i enjoy tuning,buying cars etc. just as much. Why would we be barred from that? That is the point,get around the grinding to enjoy the full game.

What are you talking about here?? I didn't say anything about this other than from the first statement you have. I also said I'm not worried about it at the moment either...

 

[FRoSTeD]

There has always been grind in GT games, especially when trying to get your second car, but you've always felt like you're getting somewhere.

The novelty and anticipation of getting that "next" car wore off rather quickly for me in GT5. If it weren't for weekly drift/time trials with 200% sign-in bonus, I'd have probably gone insane grinding out the same races over and over again.

If there were any real substance to A-Spec, if it weren't just some random conglomerate of short ill thought out boring races against crap AI I might have actually enjoyed doing the same thing over and over again to get that "next" car.

I'm hoping GT6 improves on this, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

 

[Seismica]

This is the crux of the problem, really. If it isn't at least a little bit more difficult to advance than in previous games, why the sudden inclusion of pay to win?

There has always been grind in GT games, especially when trying to get your second car, but you've always felt like you're getting somewhere. It would be very easy for pd to drop the rewards by 10 to 20 percent and suddenly people will feel the need to put their hands in their pockets to progress. Especially people like me who have very limited gaming time.

To add to this, does anybody think that perhaps a lot of the design decisions in GT5 were precursors to this? After all, the most expensive cars in GT5 required way more grinding than those in GT4. The most expensive cars in GT4 were 4,500,000 IIRC, and as you could earn car rewards more than once you could quickly gain that.

In GT5, the most expensive cars were 20 million, some were 10-15 million, and then you have a significant number of cars well into 7 figures, including used cars. As you could only win car rewards once, you had to rely on cash rewards. I Haven't looked at the cash rewards in depth, but it is pretty evident that overall the rewards were reduced, and the price of cars were increased. Combined with the reduced depth of A-spec mode, GT5 felt like a huge never ending grind. At no stage when playing did I reach a point where I was satisfied with my garage and could start racing for fun; there were always more cars that I needed to save up for.

Then we have the issue that saved games were locked to your account, which prevented people from sharing saved games. This was tied in with the online profile system, but it didn't need to be. Sharing saved games was commonplace in GT5 Prologue, which meant you could get all cars and licenses without having to grind, so players could fully enjoy the online aspect of the game.

Does anybody remember the microtransaction model originally proposed for GT:HD? It was an iRacing style content purchasing system, where you had a set amount of base content with your purchase, and had to pay a set rate for extra cars and tracks (Which would have pushed the cost for all of the content up to around $700). The community was in uproar about that and thus Sony mothballed the idea. They have waited until the fanbase calmed down, and now are easing it back into the next title, under a watered down 'optional' version. When Sony start planning for the release of GT7, they are again going to look at ways in which they can expand their revenue streams. The difference is that they will have already exhausted the 'optional' micropayments idea, they will need to go a step further. Mark my words, we are on a slippery slope.