Turn 10 Confirms Microtransaction Plans for Forza 7

[GumShoe]

Maybe not, but if that's the case can you explain how it may have affected people since it's inclusion in every game since Forza 5?

I never had them disabled, and even with it open to view in my game, it was still a non-issue. They where never forced, even when visible.

It's conditioning people to desire such things.

Hopefully it'll stay a purely optional thing, just keep an eye on how long it's taking to unlock rewards as you play; hopefully it's not longer than previously and doesn't start to introduce any frustration.

 

[Sander 001]

Granted he raises some good points, but shouldn't we wait to see exactly how they are implemented before jumping to conclusions? At this point we don't even know if you can buy loot crates with real money.

T10 may make F7 less consumer unfriendly due to all this negative feedback or they could just be waiting until all the reviews are published so they drop the clutch on the skinner box grind.

 

[Northstar]

or they could just be waiting until all the reviews are published so they drop the clutch on the skinner box grind.

Can we please stop pulling things out of thin air?

We have seen nothing to indicate such a thing is happening. It's hard enough to take you seriously with that avatar, making posts like that makes it even harder.

 

[ImaRobot]

It's conditioning people to desire such things.

Hopefully it'll stay a purely optional thing, just keep an eye on how long it's taking to unlock rewards as you play; hopefully it's not longer than previously and doesn't start to introduce any frustration.

I will be checking that out later today when I finally get a taste of the game.

 

[allsupratt]

So... only people who are annoyed about microtransactions should comment in this thread?

Oops.. I just realized he was saying that about the transactions..

I took it as he was telling people not to buy the game... my bad. And my apologies I'm getting tired of the later response from some peeps saying "dont come here to complain don't buy the game, blah, blah, blah.."

 

[Lain]

It is there for people to advance their collection without the grind. I myself could care less how others want to play. I am happy to grind out a few races to get a car I want. I'm sure in time I will have more money than I can spend, but in the mean time I will enjoy the ride.

...how about giving us cheat codes then? Y'know, like games used to do in The Old Days™? Nah, I guess they can't afford to do that... games are so expensive to make these days. Poor old Microsoft and Turn 10 are barely breaking even with their major AAA blockbuster releases, they need microtransactions in there to even turn a profit!

The hoops people jump through to justify or excuse this greedy business practice... sheesh. Even if it's only milking the super impatient, it's still milking.

And for those saying "just turn 'em off"... you may be able to turn them off at a surface level, but that doesn't turn off any influence they might've had on the overall balancing of the game. And even if the game was truly balanced normally without microtransactions in mind, turning them off doesn't stop their influence on increasing the acceptance of their presence in full-priced releases, which could result in balance of subsequent games in the series slowly getting worse and worse... just look at 2K's NBA games for an example of how that pans out.

 

[chris4652009]

as per reply in the other thread on the same topic:

11hrs on it and have just gone over 1 million CRs without even feeling like it's been a grind....you'd have to be super lazy to pay real money for CRs imho

 

[Marqus]

...how about giving us cheat codes then?

This. Right here. The gaming industry seems to have conveniently forgotten that these were an option for those who wanted quick gratification. You know, for free.

 

[Jimmy_Pop]

I have about 37 hours in game, a bit over 20 actual driving, I'm at like 600k, but have spent about 3 million on cars and stuff.

I enjoy racing, and think the economy is ok.

I personally won't use microstransactions but if someone wants to, I don't care because it doesn't effect me.

Only when a game forces you to use them does it irritate me.

 

[Lain]

I have about 37 hours in game, a bit over 20 actual driving, I'm at like 600k, but have spent about 3 million on cars and stuff.

I enjoy racing, and think the economy is ok.

I personally won't use microstransactions but if someone wants to, I don't care because it doesn't effect me.

Only when a game forces you to use them does it irritate me.

Well, the line between "optional" and "forced" is rather blurry.

So you've earned 3.6M credits in about 20 hours of driving? What if you only earned 2.6M in that time? 1.6M? Even less? At what point exactly would you consider the economy so grindy as to "force" players to pay?

The whole "I don't care because it doesn't affect me" mentality is a bit short-sighted. It might not be bad now, but the more comfortable people get with microtransactions in full-priced games, the more comfortable studios will get with ratcheting up the grind.

And even if it doesn't affect you now or ever, it's affecting and blatantly taking advantage of other people's impatience or gambling problem... so personally, I care even though it doesn't affect me either.

 

[RikkiGT-R]

...how about giving us cheat codes then? Y'know, like games used to do in The Old Days™?

This. Right here. The gaming industry seems to have conveniently forgotten that these were an option for those who wanted quick gratification. You know, for free.

The first instance I ever seen with Microtransactions actually involved cheat codes. Games years ago listed some great cheats on the back cover of their instruction manual, with a *premium rate* number to call. Ordinarily you'd have to sit listening to a long and completely unnecessary introduction before typing in the "unique" key from your copy of the game (so your codes were worthless to anyone else). Then they would slowly read out each cheat code, starting with the most pointless just to get you to stay on the line while they run up a huge bill for the call.

The old LMA Manager games from Codemasters did this after a few years of having free cheats that required simple codes entered into the game which had been hard-coded into the game like in The Good Old Days™

Games will NEVER go back to how they used to be. Not with millions of stroppy kids all over the world constantly begging parents for Microsoft Points/PSN wallet top up credit. Developers make a game, cut huge chunks out, and drip-feed various parts back to the players as paid-for DLC.
It's a sorry state of affairs but it's not going to change.

 

[Marqus]

Well, the line between "optional" and "forced" is rather blurry.

So you've earned 3.6M credits in about 20 hours of driving? What if you only earned 2.6M in that time? 1.6M? Even less? At what point exactly would you consider the economy so grindy as to "force" players to pay?

The whole "I don't care because it doesn't affect me" mentality is a bit short-sighted. It might not be bad now, but the more comfortable people get with microtransactions in full-priced games, the more comfortable studios will get with ratcheting up the grind.

And even if it doesn't affect you now or ever, it's affecting and blatantly taking advantage of other people's impatience or gambling problem... so personally, I care even though it doesn't affect me either.

You are on a roll! Took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[Imari]

Even if it's only milking the super impatient, it's still milking.

And that's bad why exactly?

Do you also get mad at McDonalds asking if you want a large combo when you're hungry? How dare they ask if you want to pay some money for convenience?!

The whole "I don't care because it doesn't affect me" mentality is a bit short-sighted. It might not be bad now, but the more comfortable people get with microtransactions in full-priced games, the more comfortable studios will get with ratcheting up the grind.

And perhaps consumers will get better at identifying that there are some things that they'd rather not buy. I know there are a lot of people that are avoiding 2K18 and Shadow of War because of the BS that they're pulling. I'd actually rather support the sort of microtransactions that FM7 seems to have. Microtransactions aren't going to go away, but consumers can make a point that they'd prefer ones that offered convenience in an already well designed game rather than ones that offer to alleviate intentionally poor game design.

I'm happy to pay for DLC if the value proposition is worth it to me. I'm fine if other people want to pay to fast track portions of the game. If it results in a skewed economy that ruins my experience then I won't buy the game, but that's because of poor game design, not because of microtransactions.

Microtransactions can be and in some games are used well. They can encourage poor game design, but that's on the developers. Developers are totally capable of making bad games with or without microtransactions. If you're the sort of person who won't spend money on MTs, then judge the game on how it plays without them. But simply having microtransactions isn't a negative in and of itself.

 

[Lain]

And that's bad why exactly?

Do you also get mad at McDonalds asking if you want a large combo when you're hungry? How dare they ask if you want to pay some money for convenience?!

The problem is that it's utterly contrived artificial "convenience" completely at the dev's control. Extra food has real value, a dev artificially tweaking the values of your game variables does not (and if you argue otherwise, I'll again refer you to the cheat codes of yore). And them adding gambling into the mix just makes things all the worse.

Imagine if McDonalds said they'd arbitrarily hang onto your order for 5 minutes after it was ready unless you paid extra. And even if you opted to pay extra, you were only paying for a random chance of getting that artificial 5-minute wait reduced by somewhere between 1-5 minutes. That still cool?

And perhaps consumers will get better at identifying that there are some things that they'd rather not buy. I know there are a lot of people that are avoiding 2K18 and Shadow of War because of the BS that they're pulling. I'd actually rather support the sort of microtransactions that FM7 seems to have. Microtransactions aren't going to go away, but consumers can make a point that they'd prefer ones that offered convenience in an already well designed game rather than ones that offer to alleviate intentionally poor game design.

I'm happy to pay for DLC if the value proposition is worth it to me. I'm fine if other people want to pay to fast track portions of the game. If it results in a skewed economy that ruins my experience then I won't buy the game, but that's because of poor game design, not because of microtransactions.

Microtransactions can be and in some games are used well. They can encourage poor game design, but that's on the developers. Developers are totally capable of making bad games with or without microtransactions. If you're the sort of person who won't spend money on MTs, then judge the game on how it plays without them. But simply having microtransactions isn't a negative in and of itself.

The microtransactions that FM7 "seems to have" seem slightly worse than FM6's. And I'm sure FM8 onward will continue this trend and "improve" them further.

I am also fine with DLC if it's actual new content that's worth the asking price. However, I am not fine with devs exploiting people's impatience and propensity towards gambling... especially when it can be artificially exacerbated by shrewd game design, subtly too.

But although I disagree with microtransactions in full-price game and do think it's a negative in and of itself, I'm still buying FM7 and will naturally judge it the way I experience it (i.e. without microtransactions)

 

[Marqus]

And perhaps consumers will get better at identifying that there are some things that they'd rather not buy. I know there are a lot of people that are avoiding 2K18 and Shadow of War because of the BS that they're pulling. I'd actually rather support the sort of microtransactions that FM7 seems to have. Microtransactions aren't going to go away, but consumers can make a point that they'd prefer ones that offered convenience in an already well designed game rather than ones that offer to alleviate intentionally poor game design.

2K18 and Shadow of War has the worst kind of microtranactions the game industry has to offer at the moment. If it takes this level of ant-consumer BS to get people to finally notice them, then I fear for the future of gaming.
Also you speak of convenience. I believe @Lain has your solution. They're called cheat codes. We used to get them for free. I refuse to believe game devs can't come with a way to make game progression fair and time efficient without asking us to open our wallets after we gave them upwards of $100.

I'm happy to pay for DLC if the value proposition is worth it to me. I'm fine if other people want to pay to fast track portions of the game. If it results in a skewed economy that ruins my experience then I won't buy the game, but that's because of poor game design, not because of microtransactions.

Again, cheat codes.

Microtransactions can be and in some games are used well. They can encourage poor game design, but that's on the developers. Developers are totally capable of making bad games with or without microtransactions. If you're the sort of person who won't spend money on MTs, then judge the game on how it plays without them. But simply having microtransactions isn't a negative in and of itself.

That's only true if you think microtranactions are OK in games you've already paid for. I strongly do not. No matter how people try to justify them.

 

[Imari]

The problem is that it's utterly contrived artificial "convenience" completely at the dev's control. Extra food has real value, a dev artificially tweaking the values of your game variables does not (and if you argue otherwise, I'll again refer you to the cheat codes of yore). And them adding gambling into the mix just makes things all the worse.

I've already said my piece in this thread on loot boxes. TL;DR, I don't like them. Depending on the implementation, I think they're a cute way of using human psychology to squeeze out a bit of excitement or abusive and disrespectful towards the player.

You're assuming that the dev is artificially tweaking the economy to drive players towards microtransactions. That's not necessarily the case. Let's think of an imaginary example: I publish an HD remaster of GT4 with everything exactly as it was, but with the addition of being able to also pay real money to respin a prize wheel after a race.

Nothing has changed about the game, it's purely an additional feature that you can choose to use or not as you see fit. The economy was clearly designed without microtransactions in mind, because they didn't exist at the time. Is this hypothetical GT4 HD a problem? I would say not, but I'm curious as to what you think and why.

Imagine if McDonalds said they'd arbitrarily hang onto your order for 5 minutes after it was ready unless you paid extra. And even if you opted to pay extra, you were only paying for a random chance of getting that artificial 5-minute wait reduced by somewhere between 1-5 minutes. That still cool?

Like I said, game design is the problem, not the microtransactions. Designing a bad game and then offering to fix it for money is abusive. Designing a good game and offering additional content/features for extra money is good business practice. The difference lies in a couple of places; firstly, the intention of the developer, and secondly, the actual value that you're receiving for each "object" you pay for.

Abusive microtransactions try to trick you into purchases that you rationally wouldn't make if they were presented to you differently. "Good" microtransactions offer fair purchases where both the consumer and the company are happy with the exchange that has taken place.

This is why gambling is generally considered bad. If I offered to sell you a $10 note for $20, you'd tell me to sod off. But when that same transaction is obscured by a web of probabilities and long term outcomes that many people are not mathematically equipped to analyse, it can become abusive. Ditto microtransactions. I only find them to be bad when they're trying to pull the same trick; get the player to buy something they otherwise wouldn't by obscuring the true value or appealing to psychological tricks to bypass normal rational purchasing decisions.

BUT...and this is the big but...microtransactions are not required to be abusive, even though many are. (Thank you, mobile gaming industry.)

However, I am not fine with devs exploiting people's impatience and propensity towards gambling... especially when it can be artificially exacerbated by shrewd game design, subtly too.

I don't like that either. But I don't assume that any game with microtransactions is by default exploiting it's players. Nor do I assume that the design of the game was altered by the presence of the microtransactions. In many cases that's so, but I'd rather judge on a game by game basis rather than arbitrarily lumping all games that share a mechanic together.

2K18 and Shadow of War has the worst kind of microtranactions the game industry has to offer at the moment. If it takes this level of ant-consumer BS to get people to finally notice them, then I fear for the future of gaming.

It doesn't take that level of BS to get people to notice them. Gamers have been noticing for years. Look up Gran Turismo HD/Vision Gran Turismo and see the outcry over that. However, this may be the level of BS that it takes to get Joe Casual to notice and to get enough people not to buy the game to have a real impact on the developers/publishers bottom line.

Like it or not, companies are clearly still making money on games with microtransactions in them. Almost certainly more than they would in games without them. Until that changes, you're going to keep seeing microtransactions. Businesses are out to make money, not friends.

Also you speak of convenience. I believe @Lain has your solution. They're called cheat codes. We used to get them for free. I refuse to believe game devs can't come with a way to make game progression fair and time efficient without asking us to open our wallets after we gave them upwards of $100.

But cheat codes only satisfy the consumer. You're forgetting that developers and publishers are there to be satisfied as well. How do cheat codes satisfy their wants and needs?

There's an old saying, "If you're good at something, never do it for free". From which one could also read the implication "If you have something that someone wants, never give it to them for free". Often companies will give stuff away for no monetary cost, but in those cases they're usually getting their value in good will, or visibility, or whatever.

Cheat codes kind of by definition are methods of playing the game outside of what it's designed to do. If some people want to use those, then that's fine, but it's in the company's interest to charge for it. If they don't, then that's a revenue stream that they could be using but they aren't. Basically, they'd be awful at their jobs.

They also get to choose what is and isn't included as base functionality in the game. Now, for non-F2P games I believe that whatever is offered for the shelf price should be complete and fully functional in and of itself (Prince of Persia 2008 being a major offender for holding the true ending as DLC). However, that does not preclude the developer from adding extras for extra cost.

One need only look at the automobile industry to see examples of this. You can buy a base model Camry for however much, or you can pay extra for a number of extra conveniences. The base model is perfectly functional as a vehicle. Are you entitled to air con, electric everything and a big engine for base model money? Or is the company entitled to charge extra for additions above the minimum functional level?

That's only true if you think microtranactions are OK in games you've already paid for. I strongly do not. No matter how people try to justify them.

You're doing a poor job of explaining why, though. Let's imagine a game, Imari's Island Adventure. You buy Imari's Island Adventure for full price and it offers an extraordinarily good game experience (obviously) and a great amount of content for the price you paid off the shelf. Seriously, this is the best game you've ever played by a significant margin. It also includes microtransactions.

Is this a bad purchase because it has microtransactions, despite the fact that this is the best game that has given you the most enjoyment per dollar you've ever had without you touching the microtransactions once? Or are you just mad that there's extra content/features that exist that the (wise, handsome and sparklingly brilliant) developer has decided should be included as additional purchases?

I don't dispute that microtransactions can be abusive, and can wreck otherwise good games. There are many, many examples of them doing so. I dispute that any game with microtransactions is worse simply because it has microtransactions in it. That is not correct. You can make an argument why any given game with microtransactions is worse off for them, but it's not a case of simply saying "MICROTRANSACTIONS ARE BAD, QED". That is a fallacy.

If you want to make your argument, then make it. Don't hide behind generalisations.

 

[McLaren]

Well, the line between "optional" and "forced" is rather blurry.

So you've earned 3.6M credits in about 20 hours of driving? What if you only earned 2.6M in that time? 1.6M? Even less? At what point exactly would you consider the economy so grindy as to "force" players to pay?

The whole "I don't care because it doesn't affect me" mentality is a bit short-sighted. It might not be bad now, but the more comfortable people get with microtransactions in full-priced games, the more comfortable studios will get with ratcheting up the grind.

And even if it doesn't affect you now or ever, it's affecting and blatantly taking advantage of other people's impatience or gambling problem... so personally, I care even though it doesn't affect me either.

Playing the "what if" game is silly. What if he only earned 4.6M in that time? 5.6M? Double that? What happens to your argument, then?

I'm already at 2 million CR and have been handed more than my fair share of discounted cars (some of which became free), cash options, & driver suits (I've passed on these). A lot of the locked cars in the game don't need to be acquired through micro-transactions; the game gives them to you for free if you complete a task. I just got the 918 Spyder & 911 GT1 this morning through their showcases. I imagine a lot of the other locked cars are hidden in those events as well. I'm basically being left to a point where I'd rather beat the whole career & use the Driver Leveling system to see what kind of cars I can get discounted/free than buy them and spend the 30,000-300,000cr I'll make back after a couple races on the boxes for ****s & giggles. The mods in them can give you a solid boost on top of payouts and some of them do guarantee free stuff. All of which tells me so far, that I'll never need to spend any real currency on this game to get an item faster.

The game's economy isn't as controversial as it appears once you dig into it. The cars aren't as easy to come by as before, but grind isn't that bad, either.

 

[Lain]

I've already said my piece in this thread on loot boxes. TL;DR, I don't like them. Depending on the implementation, I think they're a cute way of using human psychology to squeeze out a bit of excitement or abusive and disrespectful towards the player.

You're assuming that the dev is artificially tweaking the economy to drive players towards microtransactions. That's not necessarily the case. Let's think of an imaginary example: I publish an HD remaster of GT4 with everything exactly as it was, but with the addition of being able to also pay real money to respin a prize wheel after a race.

Nothing has changed about the game, it's purely an additional feature that you can choose to use or not as you see fit. The economy was clearly designed without microtransactions in mind, because they didn't exist at the time. Is this hypothetical GT4 HD a problem? I would say not, but I'm curious as to what you think and why.

I think the presence of microtransactions certainly calls the game balance into serious question. Could a game a game be balanced in such a way as to make the presence of microtransactions relatively painless? Sure. Am I going to take the dev's word for it when they say they balanced it fairly? No. As I already stated, the line between properly and improperly balanced is very blurry... and greed assures that plenty of studios will take advantage of that fact. FM7 seems to be an example of microtransactions done relatively "well", for instance... but they still impact the experience, moreso than they did in the previous iteration thanks to the introduction of loot boxes. You might still be able to enjoy the game mostly unbothered by these elements, but they are still encroaching on the experience. And they'll only continue getting worse if consumers support these practices, which they sadly will.

It's especially shady when studios conveniently fail to disclose such info until mere days before the game releases... though I suppose it doesn't matter much when the balance can be readjusted at the dev's whim at any time via patches. Launch with good balance for good reviews, then tighten it up post-launch. Still, you should have an idea of a game's microtransaction plan well in advance of them raking in pre-orders, not the other way around.

Now regarding a hypothetical GT4 HD with microtransactions. If I know for a fact that the game wasn't balanced with microtransactions in mind and it's not just some PR people blowing smoke up everyone's asses, then yeah the game itself will be fine. The microtransactions would still be bullcrap though, and I would still criticize them... my critique of microtransactions is separate from the critique of the game, if it doesn't affect the game.

I don't like that either. But I don't assume that any game with microtransactions is by default exploiting it's players. Nor do I assume that the design of the game was altered by the presence of the microtransactions. In many cases that's so, but I'd rather judge on a game by game basis rather than arbitrarily lumping all games that share a mechanic together.

Microtransactions by their very nature are exploitative. Even if a game is balanced in the purest possible way, the presence of microtransactions as an option might still tempt some people into throwing their money away for nothing of any real value in return.

I don't lump all games with microtransactions together... Clearly FM7 isn't the same breed as NBA 2K18. But I'm still gonna call out microtransactions in a full priced release for what they are... greedy cashgrabs. Doesn't matter if the gameplay balance is complicit or not.

Playing the "what if" game is silly. What if he only earned 4.6M in that time? 5.6M? Double that? What happens to your argument, then?

I'm already at 2 million CR and have been handed more than my fair share of discounted cars (some of which became free), cash options, & driver suits (I've passed on these). A lot of the locked cars in the game don't need to be acquired through micro-transactions; the game gives them to you for free if you complete a task. I just got the 918 Spyder & 911 GT1 this morning through their showcases. I imagine a lot of the other locked cars are hidden in those events as well. I'm basically being left to a point where I'd rather beat the whole career & use the Driver Leveling system to see what kind of cars I can get discounted/free than buy them and spend the 30,000-300,000cr I'll make back after a couple races on the boxes for ****s & giggles. The mods in them can give you a solid boost on top of payouts and some of them do guarantee free stuff. All of which tells me so far, that I'll never need to spend any real currency on this game to get an item faster.

The game's economy isn't as controversial as it appears once you dig into it. The cars aren't as easy to come by as before, but grind isn't that bad, either.

What if he could be earning 10000M but is only earning what he is because of microtransactions? The point of the "what if" was to make it apparent that you can't really say with certainty how much the presence of microtransactions affected the game balance, which still holds.

It's great that Forza 7 seems to be balanced very well. My critique of its microtransactions are more a critique of the developer (and the game industry as a whole) than of the game.

 

[GumShoe]

Oh ffs. Such contradiction. If you don't like loot boxes, why do you then go on to argue why they don't matter? If they didn't you'd have no opinion on them, not dislike them.

I also keep seeing 'it doesn't affect me.' No, not directly, but it affects the game design, the systems created and underneath it does effect you eventually. Maybe not right now, but the more people are complacent and dismissive of these mechanics the more they're practically endorsed and become more invasive.

Here:

Go ahead, enjoy your reward system as replacement for rewarding design. Good work T10, people don't mind the Loot Boxes after all.

 

[Marqus]

I've already said my piece in this thread on loot boxes. TL;DR, I don't like them. Depending on the implementation, I think they're a cute way of using human psychology to squeeze out a bit of excitement or abusive and disrespectful towards the player.

You're assuming that the dev is artificially tweaking the economy to drive players towards microtransactions. That's not necessarily the case. Let's think of an imaginary example: I publish an HD remaster of GT4 with everything exactly as it was, but with the addition of being able to also pay real money to respin a prize wheel after a race.

Nothing has changed about the game, it's purely an additional feature that you can choose to use or not as you see fit. The economy was clearly designed without microtransactions in mind, because they didn't exist at the time. Is this hypothetical GT4 HD a problem? I would say not, but I'm curious as to what you think and why.



Like I said, game design is the problem, not the microtransactions. Designing a bad game and then offering to fix it for money is abusive. Designing a good game and offering additional content/features for extra money is good business practice. The difference lies in a couple of places; firstly, the intention of the developer, and secondly, the actual value that you're receiving for each "object" you pay for.

Abusive microtransactions try to trick you into purchases that you rationally wouldn't make if they were presented to you differently. "Good" microtransactions offer fair purchases where both the consumer and the company are happy with the exchange that has taken place.

This is why gambling is generally considered bad. If I offered to sell you a $10 note for $20, you'd tell me to sod off. But when that same transaction is obscured by a web of probabilities and long term outcomes that many people are not mathematically equipped to analyse, it can become abusive. Ditto microtransactions. I only find them to be bad when they're trying to pull the same trick; get the player to buy something they otherwise wouldn't by obscuring the true value or appealing to psychological tricks to bypass normal rational purchasing decisions.

BUT...and this is the big but...microtransactions are not required to be abusive, even though many are. (Thank you, mobile gaming industry.)



I don't like that either. But I don't assume that any game with microtransactions is by default exploiting it's players. Nor do I assume that the design of the game was altered by the presence of the microtransactions. In many cases that's so, but I'd rather judge on a game by game basis rather than arbitrarily lumping all games that share a mechanic together.



It doesn't take that level of BS to get people to notice them. Gamers have been noticing for years. Look up Gran Turismo HD/Vision Gran Turismo and see the outcry over that. However, this may be the level of BS that it takes to get Joe Casual to notice and to get enough people not to buy the game to have a real impact on the developers/publishers bottom line.

Like it or not, companies are clearly still making money on games with microtransactions in them. Almost certainly more than they would in games without them. Until that changes, you're going to keep seeing microtransactions. Businesses are out to make money, not friends.



But cheat codes only satisfy the consumer. You're forgetting that developers and publishers are there to be satisfied as well. How do cheat codes satisfy their wants and needs?

There's an old saying, "If you're good at something, never do it for free". From which one could also read the implication "If you have something that someone wants, never give it to them for free". Often companies will give stuff away for no monetary cost, but in those cases they're usually getting their value in good will, or visibility, or whatever.

Cheat codes kind of by definition are methods of playing the game outside of what it's designed to do. If some people want to use those, then that's fine, but it's in the company's interest to charge for it. If they don't, then that's a revenue stream that they could be using but they aren't. Basically, they'd be awful at their jobs.

They also get to choose what is and isn't included as base functionality in the game. Now, for non-F2P games I believe that whatever is offered for the shelf price should be complete and fully functional in and of itself (Prince of Persia 2008 being a major offender for holding the true ending as DLC). However, that does not preclude the developer from adding extras for extra cost.

One need only look at the automobile industry to see examples of this. You can buy a base model Camry for however much, or you can pay extra for a number of extra conveniences. The base model is perfectly functional as a vehicle. Are you entitled to air con, electric everything and a big engine for base model money? Or is the company entitled to charge extra for additions above the minimum functional level?



You're doing a poor job of explaining why, though. Let's imagine a game, Imari's Island Adventure. You buy Imari's Island Adventure for full price and it offers an extraordinarily good game experience (obviously) and a great amount of content for the price you paid off the shelf. Seriously, this is the best game you've ever played by a significant margin. It also includes microtransactions.

Is this a bad purchase because it has microtransactions, despite the fact that this is the best game that has given you the most enjoyment per dollar you've ever had without you touching the microtransactions once? Or are you just mad that there's extra content/features that exist that the (wise, handsome and sparklingly brilliant) developer has decided should be included as additional purchases?

I don't dispute that microtransactions can be abusive, and can wreck otherwise good games. There are many, many examples of them doing so. I dispute that any game with microtransactions is worse simply because it has microtransactions in it. That is not correct. You can make an argument why any given game with microtransactions is worse off for them, but it's not a case of simply saying "MICROTRANSACTIONS ARE BAD, QED". That is a fallacy.

If you want to make your argument, then make it. Don't hide behind generalisations.

And that's any of my problem how? As a consumer, a business's interests are not my concern. As it should be. Also,

A thing's reason for existing is a ridiculous justification for what it does.
"Viruses just want to self replicate! don't you dare stamp down on them!"

Furthermore, even after all the sponsors, pre-orders, season passes, special editions, limited editions, and whatever tat they come with they STILL feel the the need to add in microtransactions? Because these poor multi-million dollar companies just can't have enough money, right?

I don't know how anymore clear I can be. I will never accept microtransactions on paid games. Those should remain in the realm for free to play games. That is why they're bloody free to begin with. Your payment is having to put up with them. In this instance, however, they're trying to have their cake and eat it too.

You said it yourself, people are seeing these kinds of things and are protesting. And that is exactly what I'm doing here. I've never felt so strongly about microtransactions until last year and it's too late for me to vote with my wallet on this instance. But I will continue to fight against these things where ever they crop up from now on. Shadow of War was the last straw. They must be discouraged before it becomes too late to fix it. I know companies can afford it.

 

[ImaRobot]

It's conditioning people to desire such things.

Hopefully it'll stay a purely optional thing, just keep an eye on how long it's taking to unlock rewards as you play; hopefully it's not longer than previously and doesn't start to introduce any frustration.

I did only 3 races yesterday, and I'm sitting on 400k~ right now. There is not an issue with payouts. There is a free car for me waiting at the end of every race so far.

 

[sems4arsenal]

Looks like Jim Sterling's next video will go after FM7. This will go down well.

 

[GTFan24]

Looks like Jim Sterling's next video will go after FM7. This will go down well.

Wait is he really doing it?!

 

[JakeMR2]

Wait is he really doing it?!

He probably will. I watched his newest episode today.

 

[sems4arsenal]

Wait is he really doing it?!

Yep. I don't agree with everything he says but I'm interested in his thoughts.

 

[BuckFly]

I did only 3 races yesterday, and I'm sitting on 400k~ right now. There is not an issue with payouts. There is a free car for me waiting at the end of every race so far.

Side question: how do you guys maximize credits?

Thank you, in advance for your response.

 

[ImaRobot]

Side question: how do you guys maximize credits?

Thank you, in advance for your response.

I have Ai on unbeatable and use the Long option for race length. Having only done a couple of races, I don't know the best method yet, but I just play the game, to be honest. Not doing anything special.

 

[BuckFly]

I have Ai on unbeatable and use the Long option for race length. Having only done a couple of races, I don't know the best method yet, but I just play the game, to be honest. Not doing anything special.

Thanks, Ima!

 

[Imari]

And that's any of my problem how? As a consumer, a business's interests are not my concern. As it should be.

Perhaps so. However, if you're asking or expecting something of another party, it might do you well to consider how what you're asking might be in their interests as well. After all, the rest of the world doesn't exist simply to service your needs and desires.

By way of explanation, have a look at the first couple of minutes of this quite interesting video:



Don't be like Lommy. If you want developers and publishers to act a certain way, then you're going to have to make sure that there's something in it for them too.

Furthermore, even after all the sponsors, pre-orders, season passes, special editions, limited editions, and whatever tat they come with they STILL feel the the need to add in microtransactions? Because these poor multi-million dollar companies just can't have enough money, right?

I think you misunderstand how companies work. There is no "enough money". If you ask a company whether they'd like to make another million dollars, the answer will never be "I dunno, I feel like we have enough already".

When you get a job, your job is to make money for the company, directly or indirectly. If it wasn't, then the "company" would be a non-profit, or a charity, or some other institution. Companies exist to make money, and your continued insistence that they should for some reason not attempt to do this to the best of their ability shows a profound ignorance of how the real world works.

Oddly, to a certain extent money to a company is basically the score. Higher is better. It becomes a somewhat meaningless number, or at least I find it to be so. We can destroy $100k worth of product through production errors at work, and that's unfortunate but life goes on. We make more product and try not to do it again.

If I lost $100k in my personal life that's probably me financially wrecked for the next twenty years. Personal finance and business finance are not even remotely comparable, which is why ideas like "enough money" and not attempting to maximise return on a product are so laughable.

I don't know how anymore clear I can be. I will never accept microtransactions on paid games. Those should remain in the realm for free to play games. That is why they're bloody free to begin with. Your payment is having to put up with them. In this instance, however, they're trying to have their cake and eat it too.

You're very clear about your position. You're completely avoiding explaining any reasoning behind it. I provided several examples of analogous situations, and you refused to use any of them to explain why microtransactions are bad in and of themselves.

The act of having spent money on a product does not preclude the idea of spending further money on that product at a later date. This exists in many, MANY other industries. Things like loss leaders can be the backbone of entire industries (hello, razor blades).

Please just put down your pitchfork, turn your anger down to a simmer and see if you can't reason out exactly what it is that you find wrong. And then see how many other industries you can find it in and see if you feel the same.

You said it yourself, people are seeing these kinds of things and are protesting. And that is exactly what I'm doing here. I've never felt so strongly about microtransactions until last year and it's too late for me to vote with my wallet on this instance. But I will continue to fight against these things where ever they crop up from now on. Shadow of War was the last straw. They must be discouraged before it becomes too late to fix it. I know companies can afford it.

I said people are seeing examples of abusive microtransactions and protesting. As they should, and as I also do. 2K18 and Shadow of War are BS and should not be tolerated.

FM7 may also be an example of abusive microtransactions. It certainly doesn't appear to be entirely benign, but then the whole "just switch it off" thing does make a compelling counterpoint. Companies that are really being abusive don't give you a way out.

As far as it being too late for you to vote with your wallet, I take it you preordered then? Because that's the only way they'd have your money before you found out about the microtransaction plans. Are you actually trying to preach to people about microtransactions for a game that you preordered?

Preorder culture is far more insidious than microtransactions. In the modern day of digital distribution and copious shelf space, there is almost always no benefit to the consumer to preordering other than whatever tat the publishers bundle with the game. Usually content that could have been included in the base game, but has been separated to give people an excuse to lay down their cash before there is sufficient information to make a truly informed purchasing decision.

Preorder bonuses aside, there is literally no advantage to the consumer to preordering over simply purchasing on day 1. It's an emotional investment that somehow companies have convinced people to make, because they know that once you have your money it's psychologically much harder to cancel that preorder than to just roll with it. Unlike microtransactions, there's really no way to even imagine a benign example of preorders where there's mutual benefit for the publisher and the consumer.

If you want to lecture people about the evils of microtransactions and how they're ruining gaming, perhaps look at your own behaviour first. People in glass houses and all that.

 

[breyzipp]

While I don’t support the thought of micro transactions at all, even with the reduced payouts and loss of VIP bonus I think it’s not as bad as it looks (read my credit farming tips in the thread I posted here). As you grind through the drivers cup you get some very good cars from the showcases. As you increase in collector level the discount increases as well.

I’m now at the second round (more unlocked part) of the drivers cup and with only 3 showcases left to do (all endurance events) I got all these cars for free from showcases:

Spoiler: List from tier 5 towards tier 1 cars

Tier 5:
2005 Ford GT
1958 Aston Martin DBR1
2016 Aston Martin Vulcan
1989 Ferrari F40 Competizione
2014 Ferrari FXX K
2013 Lamborghini Veneno
1998 Mercedes-Benz AMG CLK GTR
2015 Nissan #23 GT-R LM NISMO
1998 Porsche 911 GT1 Strassenversion
2014 Porsche 918 Spyder

Tier 4:
1934 Alfa Romeo P3
2014 Audi #45 Flying Lizard Motorsports R8 LMS ultra
1967 Brabham BT24
2014 Chevrolet #3 Corvette Racing Corvette C7.R
2014 Mazda #70 SpeedSource Lola B12/80
2011 Porsche #45 Flying Lizard 911 GT3 RSR

Tier 3:
1989 Audi #4 Audi 90 quattro IMSA GTO
1985 Ford RS200 Evolution
2016 Ford GYMKHANA 9 Focus RS RX
2016 Ford Shelby GT350R

Tier 2:
2000 Ford SVT Cobra R
2017 Ford F-150 Raptor
1970 Volkswagen #1107 Desert Dingo Racing Stock Bug

Tier 1:
2013 Cadillac XTS Limousine
1975 Ford Bronco
2010 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor
2014 Ford Fiesta ST

The other 3 cars I will get from those endurance events I still got to complete are a Porsche 919 Hybrid, Ford GT LM GTE and a Honda Civic WTCC. Not sure what the reward will be for completing all 6 championships again, probably another 6 FE cars.

I’ve been doing open championships the most with the Nissan GT-R FE (50% CR bonus), otherwise any other FE car I have, and if even that was not possible then focus on a series that doesn’t have any FE cars at all (racing series mostly).

I’m now level 55, car tier 12 and my next level up rewards are 50k CR or 400k CR discount on a car. I don’t know why that CR reward got stuck at 50k (been long now) but at least the car discount number keeps increasing. Also with higher car tier the offers get better as well. Currently I’m staring at an IndyCar for my next reward, one that also passed by today was the McLaren P1 but even after the discount that was still over 800k CR which I didn’t have.

Some other of my stats:
171 races completed
139 cars in garage
16h50 time played

Only been playing the drivers cup so far. Not really interested in multiplayer, maybe I’ll play it a bit in the future when leagues are working.