Would people really prefer having to pay for Battle Passes or monthly DLC packs for cars and race tracks?
- Thread starter Magog
- 94 comments
- 3,512 views
Buyer beware and hindsight being what they are I personally wouldn't have bought the 25th Anni Edn. If I'd known about the current model, let alone plans to run it as a GaaS.
To answer your question though, like the poster above mentioned there are alternatives using that model already. So, no, I wouldn't be playing GT at all.
To answer your question though, like the poster above mentioned there are alternatives using that model already. So, no, I wouldn't be playing GT at all.
- 1,565
- United Kingdom
I‘d pay a monthly sub to have all single player elements removed from online and have all cars and tracks available for online only racing and time trials. Changing my oil sums up the absurdity of the current schizophrenic approach
Rudenut
Premium
- 573
- Atl, GA
- SaintFu-
I would, I would also pay a subscription service for access to battlepass style content or monthly content drops.
The problem with MTX is that to make them viable, especially in this particular model, the game play progression must be slow enough to make the MTX enticing to those who would buy them. Everyone suffers so that Sony can exploit whales.
With a subscription many more people contribute. This supports further developement and allows the progress to be balanced around content and game play. It just costs everyone a little bit.
Last edited:
- 785
- Podium, Center
- Tha-Ghoast
- huh?
Highly disagree with this. Competition is a good thing. The only reason iRacing is "expensive" is a because there is no other available option. Even at $5/Month $5/Car/Track for a Sony/PD iRacing clone, it's still a lot cheaper to pick up a PS5 than it is to build a PC and all the extra variables outside of the actual driving experience that comes with that. There's a reason people pay for iRacing.
- 13,265
- GTPlanet
- Street-King-07
- Quattro Saltire
Normal DLC packs > Battle Passes/subscrptions
I'd rather just pay for a pack then and there for a bunch of content instead of having to further grind my way through to something thats locked behind a battle pass tier. Also subscription-type services are just as parasitic as demonstrated by iRacing, which in reality is just a glorified rental service disguised as a game.
I'd rather just pay for a pack then and there for a bunch of content instead of having to further grind my way through to something thats locked behind a battle pass tier. Also subscription-type services are just as parasitic as demonstrated by iRacing, which in reality is just a glorified rental service disguised as a game.
Last edited:
Rudenut
Premium
- 573
- Atl, GA
- SaintFu-
I am of the opinion that very little actual work has actually been done on this game. When you compare this to a game like destiny, you can se what little difference there is between gt7 and sport.
The whole ui is a mess, they reverted back to things that were fixed in previous games. It is nearly as if they remake every game without even using the previous game as a reference.
Progression would not be too fast if there was an actual game here. There are many ways to expand progression. As long as you get the multi-player lobbies and sport mode down the anti-single player crew will be satisfied. This leaves the rest of your time available to explore content for single player. They need a ui expert badly.
- 2,183
- United Kingdom
- breeminator
- breeminator
I'm not sure they're doubling the rate at which you can earn credits. My interpretation was that it's only going to be the events that currently underpay that will be increased. Some of them might move above the current best earners, but I don't think they'll be anywhere near double the current best earners. For example, the WTC 800 race at Daytona, if it doubled in payout, would still only be around 17% better than the Trial Mountain championship is today.
- 55
- Scotland
A battle pass would be a neat idea, assuming it wasn’t too expensive and the rewards were purely cosmetic. I’m not a fan of locking more substantive content - like cars - behind an additional paywall (unless the game itself is F2P).
Paid DLC could also work well, provided they were packed with great content and not too frequent. But again, I would want the initial cost of the game to reflect the intent to monetise the game in this way long term.
Given the cost of GT7, I think the free expansion approach at regular intervals is the best way to proceed.
Paid DLC could also work well, provided they were packed with great content and not too frequent. But again, I would want the initial cost of the game to reflect the intent to monetise the game in this way long term.
Given the cost of GT7, I think the free expansion approach at regular intervals is the best way to proceed.
- 875
- NS, Canada
If they double the World GT Series payout it will be 1.2 million per hour, and if they double the 1st race in Pan-Am, it will also be aleast 1.2 million per hour.
- 55
- Scotland
I suspect the first race in Pan-Am will be moved to the last race.
Rudenut
Premium
- 573
- Atl, GA
- SaintFu-
The bottom end of acceptable then. That is still like 18 hours for the most expensive car.
- 1,320
- Setúbal
- dacc10
I think most people, myself included, would rather get new content for free, since we already paid for the game. In theory, having MTX* in the game, would allow for that, free content, just like in GTS. We already pay for PS Plus just to play online, so paying an extra subscription is just... unnecessary.
Plus, locking content behind a paywall has never been a good idea for the consumer in gaming. It may not be worth buying a DLC pack with, let's say, 10 cars, and only one interests you, or something along the line of a Season Pass, that would include all the DLCs, but with us players having no idea on how many and which cars and tracks would be added.
I'd like that they kept things free.
Plus, locking content behind a paywall has never been a good idea for the consumer in gaming. It may not be worth buying a DLC pack with, let's say, 10 cars, and only one interests you, or something along the line of a Season Pass, that would include all the DLCs, but with us players having no idea on how many and which cars and tracks would be added.
I'd like that they kept things free.
- 875
- NS, Canada
- 55
- Scotland
The key issue with GT7 is their microtransaction model is situated on the intent to perpetually sell us ‘core’ content, in the form of highly desirable, infrequently (and unpredictably) available cars - rather than optional cosmetics. This has the effect of creating a feeling amongst the playerbase that they are selling us things we have already paid for. It’s perhaps the worst model they could have gone with, considering the nature of the game (and the historic appeal of the franchise).
- 113
- Montréal
- TurismoFan1986
Battlefield used to have a "Premium" service for a few years (BF3, 4, Hardline, and 1). For a one time fee you got all the DLCs as soon as they came out. I always bought it. I guess I would buy it if PD introduced something similar, however it would be pretty weird as GTS gave all of its DLC away for free.
Lain
Premium
- 7,084
- Pasadena, TX
- Yaywalter
I do have a problem paying for new content, for a few reasons:
1. I’m poor, lol
2. GT7 is light on wholly new content and that’s only being excused because GTS set the precedent of substantial free content updates.
3. Between being a full price title and the MTX monetization, they’re already double dipping… I wouldn’t want to support ‘em going for the triple dip.
So, for those reasons, unless any hypothetical DLC represented an insanely good value (akin to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe’s 48 tracks for $25, which works out to about 50 cents per track… and we’re talking unique tracks, not layout variations), I’d probably have a hard time justifying it.
Well I think that's the whole point of this thread, OP is suggesting we've got to choose between MTX or paying for DLC. Not that I agree, mind you. This game is backed by Sony, they can do free updates and no MTX and still turn a profit on their $70 game. The staff members are still going to be paid in the next four years whether they're updating GT7 or working on GT8.
At the very least they could do a mixture of free and paid stuff.
Last edited:
Rudenut
Premium
- 573
- Atl, GA
- SaintFu-
- 13,844
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Yes. I would prefer a clear and open transaction where I pay a set amount of money for a known amount of content. A traditional DLC or expansion model.
I do not prefer a system in which I pay for in-game credits to buy stuff that I've already paid for, then trust that the game and economy hasn't been altered from what it would have been otherwise and that the DLC I will receive is stuff that I would have been happy to be supporting in the first place. It's all entirely too obscured and misleading for me to be comfortable with as a transaction.
If developers are confident in their content and their gameplay, be upfront about the price. If it's good enough, people will pay.
I do not prefer a system in which I pay for in-game credits to buy stuff that I've already paid for, then trust that the game and economy hasn't been altered from what it would have been otherwise and that the DLC I will receive is stuff that I would have been happy to be supporting in the first place. It's all entirely too obscured and misleading for me to be comfortable with as a transaction.
If developers are confident in their content and their gameplay, be upfront about the price. If it's good enough, people will pay.
- 249
- United Kingdom
this game in this form no, a future GT built from the ground up around this payment model has limitless potential to become a true GT service ever evolving and expanding.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,344
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
DLC with free tracks and paid cars (that we don't then have to buy again in game).
It's a model that works perfectly well with plenty of other titles on the market.
Oh and maybe take the Raceroom model of being able to test drive DLC before we buy it.
You also have to keep in mind that GT5 had a mix of both free and paid DLC, so it wouldn't be the first time. However, a repeat of the paid for, single use paint chips from GT5 can burn, PDs first attempt to 'nickel and dime' players.
It's a model that works perfectly well with plenty of other titles on the market.
Oh and maybe take the Raceroom model of being able to test drive DLC before we buy it.
Basically a season pass, a good number of title use they, Racing games included.
You also have to keep in mind that GT5 had a mix of both free and paid DLC, so it wouldn't be the first time. However, a repeat of the paid for, single use paint chips from GT5 can burn, PDs first attempt to 'nickel and dime' players.
Last edited:
