PlayStation 4 Discussion

[Azzy]

Cool, that should deter X1 scrubs buying the car day 1.

[Sami]

It's the best car in a very competitive online racing simulator. It's not supposed to be easily accessible.

 

I can see the logic - if you want to pay to win, you have to pay a lot. It deters people from doing so. If the player's that determined then they get to pocket $200 in exchange. Either way, it's not in your face and actually offers a choice. 

 

Don't get me wrong, if it was like Forza in that it made the game a boring grind-fest in order to force you to buy points, then I'd totally be with you on that. That's some bullshit. But a legitimate choice sounds fair to me. I actually kind of like that. Choice is good.

[Chronozoah]

Cool, that should deter X1 scrubs buying the car day 1.

Gran Turismo 6's obscene monetary pricing for the most valuable car will deter Xbox One players from purchasing it? Your logic is flawless. Absolutely no need for elaboration.

Don't get me wrong, if it was like Forza in that it made the game a boring grind-fest in order to force you to buy points, then I'd totally be with you on that.

You've mentioned this multiple times. I'm assuming you can back this up with personal experience, given that you're so certain that 'slogging' through Forza for unlocks is boring. How many credits do you earn on average, and what is the average cost of a car?

[Azzy]

It's the best car in a very competitive online racing simulator. It's not supposed to be easily accessible.

 

I can see the logic - if you want to pay to win, you have to pay a lot. It deters people from doing so. If the player's that determined then they get to pocket $200 in exchange. Either way, it's not in your face and actually offers a choice. 

 

Don't get me wrong, if it was like Forza in that it made the game a boring grind-fest in order to force you to buy points, then I'd totally be with you on that. That's some bullshit. But a legitimate choice sounds fair to me. I actually kind of like that. Choice is good.

All joking aside I'm not really happy about it, but the only thing really annoying about this how this is probably going to be blown out of proportion. If the Seasonal Events in 6 pay out even half as much as it did in 5 then there's no real need for the micro-transactions unless you really want some quick cash and can't be bothered to play for it. (Seasonal events can payout more than a million credits, not just tens of thousands)

The XJ13 can probably be fucking won from a racing series in single player. And no one would want one or race with anyway.

Gran Turismo 6's obscene monetary pricing for the most valuable car will deter Xbox One players from purchasing it? Your logic is flawless. Absolutely no need for elaboration.

The X1 is a car in Gran Turismo.

[Remy]

It's the best car in a very competitive online racing simulator. It's not supposed to be easily accessible.

 

I can see the logic - if you want to pay to win, you have to pay a lot. It deters people from doing so. If the player's that determined then they get to pocket $200 in exchange. Either way, it's not in your face and actually offers a choice. 

 

Don't get me wrong, if it was like Forza in that it made the game a boring grind-fest in order to force you to buy points, then I'd totally be with you on that. That's some bullshit. But a legitimate choice sounds fair to me. I actually kind of like that. Choice is good.

GT is pretty much almost exactly as much of a grind as Forza is. Do you think they'd be able to charge 200 bucks for a car easily obtainable by normal means? 

 

This is more responding to the guy above me, anit's not out yet, so who knows, but it doesn't seem logical to me, judging by virtually every other micro-transaction scheme in history that there'd be a fun, non grindy way to get the car. They wouldn't be able to set the prices this high unless the credits were hard to earn anyway.

 

And why, exactly should they be giving an advantage to paying players anyway? Everyone who bought the game already paid 60 dollars, isn't that enough?

 

The high price isn't a deterrent, that's ridiculous. Why would you not want people to spend money on your product? The price is set as it is because they want people to spend money on the game. That's why it's there. Someone somewhere market tested that people playing GT6 would be stupid enough to, or want to throw mountains of cash at the game for cool cars and so they did it.

 

It's no scouts honor "pay if you want but REAL PLAYERS earn cars" bullshit. It's a fucking scam and so is Forza. But this game comes in a blue box, not a green one, so clearly it can't be that bad. 

 

At least Valve have taken to making the only things you pay for strictly cosmetic, and DOTA2 and TF2, the primary micro-transaction games are free to play to begin with. It's ridiculous that not only are we buying these games but then we're expected to buy additional credits. Either make the game free and sell credits or fuck off the credits and have the game be normal 

[Chronozoah]

The X1 is a car in Gran Turismo.

Your use of 'X1 scrub' was ambiguous due to it not being the recognisable designation and because if one were to theoretically be an 'X1 scrub', it would imply that they already have and use the X1 (hence the association), in which case, how is it stopping those types of people acquiring it if the premise of your point assumes that they already have it? Unless the car is an established one in GT which people have historically used until now, but even then, your choice of wording was odd, though I apologise for the misunderstanding.

I can see the logic - if you want to pay to win, you have to pay a lot.

I think I'd prefer no pay to win, period, especially given that the type of people who would fall for this are those with far more money than sense.

[Sami]

I've never played Gran Turismo, so I wouldn't know how hard it is to get money in that game. Jesus. You don't have to pull the fanboy shit.

 

I didn't see people complain about it before, and seeing as how it's exactly the same as before and exists only as an option I don't see how it's an issue. It is literally the exact same game with or without it, and had it not been included nobody would have batted an eye at the rate at which you gain money. Forza has no in-game method of gaining money efficiently, essentially forcing you to buy tokens with your own cash. That's bullshit anywhere, regardless of what fucking console it's on. If the MT's are time-savers and are not in my face or alter the game in a way to encourage their use then I really don't see how it's an issue.

 

but hey okay fanboiz and stuff

[Azzy]

GT is pretty much almost exactly as much of a grind as Forza is. Do you think they'd be able to charge 200 bucks for a car easily obtainable by normal means?

 

I doubt they made the packs available just for the XJ13.

I apologise for the misunderstanding.

No need, my fault.

[Chronozoah]

I've never played Gran Turismo, so I wouldn't know how hard it is to get money in that game. Jesus. You don't have to pull the fanboy shit.

That's probably why the 'fanboy shit' is being pulled - you're speaking with absolute certainty over things in which you not only don't have that certainty, but in which you have zero experience whatsoever. It's somewhat understandable if your views have been coloured by common conceptions and the general consensus, but stop speaking so adamantly over things in which you apparently know shit-all first-hand.

 

You still haven't answered my questions pressing you for vital details with regards to statements you made earlier in the thread.

[Sami]

That's probably why the 'fanboy shit' is being pulled - you're speaking with absolute certainty over things in which you not only don't have that certainty, but in which you have zero experience whatsoever. It's somewhat understandable if your views have been coloured by common conceptions and the general consensus, but stop speaking so adamantly over things in which you apparently know shit-all first-hand.

 

You still haven't answered my questions pressing you for vital details with regards to statements you made earlier in the thread.

 

GT6's economy is the same as GT5's.

GT5 did not have microtransactions.

GT6 has been reported to be perfectly fine without buying things.

 

Forza got a ton of shit for being a boring grind-fest. GT5 was critically acclaimed and has an enormous fanbase that gave it good reception. 

 

If GT6 is like GT5, then that must mean that it's fine.

 

It's not a hard fucking conclusion to come to.

 

I also didn't happen to read your previous post. Sorry. I didn't play Forza, no. I've read impressions of it; all of which say that it is a boring fucking chore to grind for money.

 

but hey if impressions and reviews mean absolutely nothing then I guess that's cool

[Azzy]

but stop speaking so adamantly over things in which you apparently know shit-all first-hand.

That can be said for a lot of things given that GT6 isn't out yet and no one knows the payouts for races.

[Remy]

 

I doubt they made the packs available just for the XJ13.

 

It's true, and I'm sure you could buy a lot of Ford Focuses or VW Golfs for the $200 you're spending on that one car, but surely other people can acknowledge that's it's just a little ridiculous you're buying multiples of their most expensive back to get just one car, with no others involved. The ceiling for spending cash is just way too high there, in my opinion and paying to have an advantage, via either boatloads of cash or a sweet car kind of sucks. 

 

If this car was 50 bucks it'd still be gross but I'd be like "hearing my parents having sex" grossed out and not "discovering my dad is a cannibal" level grossed out.

 

 

GT6's economy is the same as GT5's.

GT5 did not have microtransactions.

GT6 has been reported to be perfectly fine without buying things.

 

Forza got a ton of shit for being a boring grind-fest. GT5 was critically acclaimed and has an enormous fanbase that gave it good reception. 

 

If GT6 is like GT5, then that must mean that it's fine.

You've already professed to not having played Gran Tourismo but you should probably know that it's been, historically just as much of a grind as Forza has been. The whole game is essentially a do same set of races over and over > get money > buy car > do fuckloads more races > get money > buy car style grind already.

 

Surprise, GT5 was a chore, just like Forza! 

 

Now obviously you're placing more faith in them being able to resist the temptation of turning the game into an even bigger grind, but with the ability to dangle real money credits in front of people, I find it very hard to believe they won't skew the difficulty to make it more tempting to buy credits for new cars. Even if not everyone is going to spend 200$. 

 

It's much easier for me to swallow a grind in a game where there's no way to buy out of it. In past GT games the grind was there, but at least it felt like it was just the design, or how the game was. When you add MTs (is that what we're calling them now?) it makes me wonder. Is the reason the game is grindy for balancing or difficulty reasons, or is it because they want me to buy credits? 

 

EDIT: This is why I'm bent out of shape ^ at least with F2P games you know they're going to scam you going in. Seeing a retail game pull this is gross. 

[Sami]

Okay, thank you. I didn't know about that and I appreciate you pointing it out without being extremely sarcastic about it. :V

 

I read a few posts on GAF saying that GT5 was very generous with the DLC, giving a ton of free shit over the years. Cars, tracks, and whatever else. If that's true, then such a scummy tactic being adopted in the very next game just seems odd to me, and I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. 

[Azzy]

It's true, and I'm sure you could buy a lot of Ford Focuses or VW Golfs for the $200 you're spending on that one car, but surely other people can acknowledge that's it's just a little ridiculous you're buying multiples of their most expensive back to get just one car, with no others involved. The ceiling for spending cash is just way too high there, in my opinion and paying to have an advantage, via either boatloads of cash or a sweet car kind of sucks.

Why are you talking like everyone who is buying GT6 is going to spend $200 in micro-transactions?

 

You've already professed to not having played Gran Tourismo but you should probably know that it's been, historically just as much of a grind as Forza has been. The whole game is essentially a do same set of races over and over > get money > buy car > do fuckloads more races > get money > buy car style grind already.

 

Surprise, GT5 was a chore, just like Forza!

If only half of the things I've read about Forza are true then that's bullshit. There were two things I can think of that you had to grind for. First was experience levels (which you earned a lot of from special events), second was the Formula Gran Turismo (an F1 car) since you needed it to win one of the single player events. They even patched the game to give more experience and money including a % modifier if you played again the next day, the only reason people complained was because they couldn't hoard all the cars they wanted, 1000 being needed for a trophy. Credits and experience were never really an issue once Seasonals rolled out since the game threw them at you at that point.

Hilariously, you could win a massive chunk of the single player events with a Corvette ZR1 C6 which only cost around 100K of credits.

 

Now obviously you're placing more faith in them being able to resist the temptation of turning the game into an even bigger grind, but with the ability to dangle real money credits in front of people, I find it very hard to believe they won't skew the difficulty to make it more tempting to buy credits for new cars. Even if not everyone is going to spend 200$.

If I was going to predict what these have been available for it's exactly what Discoid said, an option away from grinding, not as a cop out method of farming expensive cars. If the progression in the game is the same as GT5 or anything like previous GT's then you only really need, if "need" is even the right word, one 7 million booster pack at the beginning of the game which will end any need to grind events for additional cars. But that's just guessing at what's in the game as much as you are.

[Chronozoah]

GT6's economy is the same as GT5's.

Neither of which you've experienced.

Forza got a ton of shit for being a boring grind-fest. GT5 was critically acclaimed and has an enormous fanbase that gave it good reception. 

Critical reception and popularity have no bearing on the suspect implementation of a historically ill-conceived and received monetary system. Raising them as if they were relevant factors, or even grounds for deflecting criticism of this nature relative to another game, is simply pitiful.

It's not a hard fucking conclusion to come to.

Sure, if you want to adhere to a linear line of reasoning which relies on assumption more than anything. Given that you've admitted to having zero experience with both franchises (pretty bad standing in terms of making a comparison, wouldn't you agree?), coming to this conclusion based on the information at hand is fundamentally flawed, unless you allow the consensus of others to dictate your decision-making, and arguably, that is entirely it's own issue.

but hey if impressions and reviews mean absolutely nothing then I guess that's cool

They don't mean much at all if they are vaguely cited as existing (rather than being provided) to support a position which seems fundamentally flawed. You see, the impression I'm getting here is that you've heard a few people's opinions on the issue, read a few posts perhaps, and in your eagerness combined with your preference, formed an inherent opinion without bothering to look into it further or experience either for yourself before making categorical statements which in any rational sense would need backing to be demonstrably true, as opposed to vague citings and the like, and you've simply gone with it.

 

Do note, in case there was a misunderstanding, that I'm not necessarily questioning your opinion or stance on the issue, more so your approach, or the reason why, hence my inquiry as to how much experience you had with the games, because you speak so adamantly for someone with so little first-hand knowledge and experience with them. This is also the reason why I proposed the reason why this 'fanboy shit' is being brought up, as opposed to directly accusing you of it.

 

My tone may have also appeared harsher than intended, and if so, I apologise. In future, do not construe any swearing or bluntness on my part as me being angry or pissy with anyone.

That can be said for a lot of things given that GT6 isn't out yet and no one knows the payouts for races.

Precisely.

[Sami]

Right. So let's halt all discussion on all other upcoming games while we're at it, as evidently even a statement as broad as "it was fine" requires first-hand experience.

You can't be serious.

[MegasonicZX]

To be fair its kind of understandable how you would think the rest of the games would be that way with grinds and everything since when it comes to simulation racers you can mostly expect more of the same so if the next one in a series was different in some way it would be completely justified to think that it hadn't unless you were told.

[Chronozoah]

Right. So let's halt all discussion on all other upcoming games while we're at it, as evidently even a statement as broad as "it was fine" requires first-hand experience.

I demonstrated why acting indignant in assessing the quality of two separate entities as part of a comparison in which you have zero experience and an inadequate level of knowledge (which is wholly apparent) with both entities was foolish, and made for a faulty line of reasoning. Not once did I specify that all discussion should halt based on that fact, nor should any reasonable individual extrapolate that to mean that no discussion can take place in the absence of adequate amounts of knowledge or personal experience. I merely explained why, under such circumstances, your approach wasn't necessarily the best in pursuit of a reasonable discussion.

[Milo]

Whoops. I honestly thought I was like 5 hours late on the news but I guess not. I actually read off the SEGA Forum here.

http://forums.sega.com/showthread.php?504074-Sony-I-am-Disappoint

 

Which used the source here.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Gran-Turismo-6-Top-Car-Cost-Nearly-200-60880.html

 

Which included

 

 

$200 for a car

 

$200 FUCKING DOLLARS

 

That's insane!

 

As in real money $200? Not in-game $200?

 

Why would I want to buy an in-game car (no matter how much of a game breaker/top-tier car it is) for $200 when I could just buy a brand-new videogame console/handheld system or a bunch of new games for around the same price?

 

If it was like $30 or maybe even $60 (which I agree with Remy is pushing it but it's nowhere near as ridiculously expensive) I wouldn't have much of a problem with it. :/

[Solkia]

You can obtain the money in-game. It's for people who don't want to grind.

[Sami]

Why am I even bothering with this.

This entire course of discussion started with someone making a sarcastic drive-by joke comparing Forza and Gran Turismo saying that GT is doing "the exact same thing". All I've said in regard to the comparison was that. He was incorrect, as the exact same article he posted as a reference also clearly noted that GT6 is functionally the same as GT5, otherwise. This impression comes from someone who did play the game, and is the only valid source on the subject seeing as the game isn't out yet and they were the ones to report about the MT's in the first place.

It is not a stretch to assume that most of those looking forward to playing Gran Turismo 6, who would actually be affected by a game-crippling microtransaction model, have played and enjoyed at least one of the previous games in the series. If it was not a glaring issue before, and the game is (and this bit is important) exactly the same as before, then I can't say I have a problem with the approach, which is exactly what I said in the thread.

What I don't agree with is a new game's in-game economy being much worse than the previous game because of the microtransactions. That is where the comparison does not hold up.

Regardless, the only judgment I've made in the thread is that I don't mind GT6's approach to the system as it would still be as playable a game as it's predecessor without it, whereas Forza is very different from its past installments because of it. Saying nothing of the car selection, track design, or game mechanics, the statement I made is such a broad, fundamental judgment that I can't fathom how one would need extensive first-hand experience to come to it.

[Dobkeratops]

Yeah, according to reports in GT the microtransactions are "detached" from the game itself - yes, you can go into the store and buy some credits if you want but you wouldn't even notice they were an option playing the game normally. Can you even directly buy them ingame?

 

In the other game, all of the game has been designed to nickel and dime the shit out of you. In game economy has been retuned to become extra grindy, microtransactions are always literally a single button press away, content has been cut dramatically (but hey here's some paid car/track DLCs on day one to fix that)...

 

One's what appears to be an unobtrusive option, the other's just taking the piss. Might as well call it Forza Watersports.

[Chronozoah]

All I've said in regard to the comparison was that.

Incorrect. You have made several statements directly comparing the two titles in a capacity that extends beyond simply acknowledging the difference or a sarcastic comment.

The article you're talking about also says that Gran Turismo 6's currency is gained in exactly the same way and at the same rate as Gran Turismo 5 before it, meaning that it exists for those who want it but has no bearing on the rest of the game, unlike Forza which made grinding extremely tedious and time-consuming in order to encourage players to spend more money.

Forza got a ton of shit for being a boring grind-fest. GT5 was critically acclaimed and has an enormous fanbase that gave it good reception. 

Don't get me wrong, if it was like Forza in that it made the game a boring grind-fest in order to force you to buy points, then I'd totally be with you on that. That's some bullshit. But a legitimate choice sounds fair to me. I actually kind of like that. Choice is good.

It is not a stretch to assume that most of those looking forward to playing Gran Turismo 6, who would actually be affected by a game-crippling microtransaction model, have played and enjoyed at least one of the previous games in the series. If it was not a glaring issue before, and the game is (and this bit is important) exactly the same as before, then I can't say I have a problem with the approach, which is exactly what I said in the thread.

The game obviously isn't exactly the same as before, because it has microtransactions, a component of the game not present before, and thus a hypothetical assumption is not an entirely reasonable basis to use for argument. "If it was not a glaring issue..." is irrelevant when the subject matter itself is subjective and undefined, and even if players were alright with it before, that does not automatically set the precedent that it must be okay this time, particularly because we won't be certain as to whether it is indeed exactly the same (outside of the obvious difference of handling payment options) until it releases, and even then, whether or not the grind is acceptable or not is subjective in nature, so it seems somewhat moot to say 'If it was fine before, it'll be fine now" because such a statement makes several assumptions.

Saying nothing of the car selection, track design, or game mechanics, the statement I made is such a broad, fundamental judgment that I can't fathom how one would need extensive first-hand experience to come to it.

No one said 'extensive', but making indignant and definitive statements over subject matter which you are unfamiliar with and reportedly have only based on a few vague sources thus far (still not specified) is a poor substitute for making a fair judgement after having seen it and experienced it for yourself, or for having the appropriate level of knowledge to assess the situation. You have failed on both accounts, as you have thus far admitted to a lack of experience and knowledge within and with regards to the subject at hand.

Why am I even bothering with this.

Probably E-pride.

[Milo]

You can obtain the money in-game. It's for people who don't want to grind.

 

Ah, OK then.

[Sami]

Incorrect. You have made several statements directly comparing the two titles in a capacity that extends beyond simply acknowledging the difference or a sarcastic comment.

I see nothing in those quotes that suggests I made any statement regarding the quality of either game apart from the established reception of their currency systems. It's not a matter of opinion that Forza drew a lot of controversy with it's handling of the system, not is it one that Gran Turismo 5 was acclaimed by critics and its fanbase. I'm merely stating facts.

If you want to play semantics, then fine. I suppose Forza has been crippled by its use of MT's as literally every impression I have read on the game has said that it is.

The game obviously isn't exactly the same as before, because it has microtransactions, a component of the game not present before, and thus a hypothetical assumption is not an entirely reasonable basis to use for argument. "If it was not a glaring issue..." is irrelevant when the subject matter itself is subjective and undefined, and even if players were alright with it before, that does not automatically set the precedent that it must be okay this time, particularly because we won't be certain as to whether it is indeed exactly the same (outside of the obvious difference of handling payment options) until it releases, and even then, whether or not the grind is acceptable or not is subjective in nature, so it seems somewhat moot to say 'If it was fine before, it'll be fine now" because such a statement makes several assumptions.

No one said 'extensive', but making indignant and definitive statements over subject matter which you are unfamiliar with and reportedly have only based on a few vague sources thus far (still not specified) is a poor substitute for making a fair judgement after having seen it and experienced it for yourself, or for having the appropriate level of knowledge to assess the situation. You have failed on both accounts, as you have thus far admitted to a lack of experience and knowledge within and with regards to the subject at hand.

But it is exactly the same in every other aspect, which is exactly the point I was making in the first place. I'm also now reading that the transactions aren't even available for purchase in game, either.

So yes, there is no evidence to suggest that it isn't exactly the same.

Probably E-pride.

Fuck off.