Preferred DLC strategy

[HBR-Roadhog]

Well I would always go with free but both would be the way to go.

The poll choices are not very good really, because it has the comment on the free ones about VGT and concept cars vs the real cars on the paid option. The problem there is that we have gotten some real cars [road cars and race cars] as part of the free DLC already in addition to the VGT cars and there is no reason we could not get more real cars as free DLC.

In GT5 some [most] of the free DLC was real cars and some of the paid DLC was not

End result, poll invalid

 

[Nielsen]

Well I would always go with free but both would be the way to go.

The poll choices are not very good really, because it has the comment on the free ones about VGT and concept cars vs the real cars on the paid option. The problem there is that we have gotten some real cars [road cars and race cars] as part of the free DLC already in addition to the VGT cars and there is no reason we could not get more real cars as free DLC.

In GT5 some [most] of the free DLC was real cars and some of the paid DLC was not

End result, poll invalid

I see why the examples might add confusion. Basically, one needs to distinguish between paid car packs, such as those sold for GT5, and the free only content offered for GT6. The examples are there to outline the general traits which have characterized both approaches.

By the way, the poll does not use the word "real cars" like you do to stress your point. GT5's paid DLC was definitely road cars and race cars, real or not.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't think you can have both VGT and significant levels of real world DLC cars in the PD world. In GT5, with the same number of staff they have now, we had 30 DLC cars in three years. The VGT's alone are 30 cars and the lack of other DLC representing real world cars (4 I think not including the Corvette which is a duplicate to me, + 2 Senna cars promised before launch + 1 kart ) indicates that they are about at their limit when it comes to car production for the current game. I'm sure they are busy modeling away lots of cars, but they will be held back for GT7. I said before GT6 released that it's likely we'll get the VGT's and not much more until the VGT's are done and so far it's proven correct.

In a game that was built upon the foundation of being able to drive everyday street cars on racing tracks around the world, I find it kind of ironic that so little disappointment is expressed about the complete lack of DLC in this area, 2/3 or a year into the life of the game.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

I see why the examples might add confusion. Basically, one needs to distinguish between paid car packs, such as those sold for GT5, and the free only content offered for GT6. The examples are there to outline the general traits which have characterized both approaches.

By the way, the poll does not use the word "real cars" like you do to stress your point. GT5's paid DLC was definitely road cars and race cars, real or not.

GT5 also had free DLC cars, those extra Nascars for example and the paid DLC were largely race mods of cars already in the game.

In GT6 we have gotten real race cars and fantasy race cars, we have gotten real road cars and fantasy road cars which may or may not ever become actual production cars. We have also gotten 1 new track location and variants on two other tracks that were already in the game. Odds are that we will get at least 1 more track if not more and we will get several more cars and all for free.

btw the VGT cars would technically be road cars except for the ones that would be race cars so the distinction between VGT and other cars would be if they actually exist as production cars or not.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

This poll doesn't make sense since both options are correct. VGT and other updates (Red Bull, Senna, Course Maker) that were touted as release features should be free (and they have been). New car packs and tracks made after the game is released should be paid since it costs money to make them (as they did in GT5). What surprised me is we're getting new free cars (M4, FT1, Lexus, TS030) and tracks (RB Ring, Goodwood update) for free, but probably the manufacturers paid for them to be promoted.

PD is the only developer that does DLC right these days, and I give them utmost respect for that. Compare that to Codemasters or EA who takes content out before release just so they can resell them as "DLC". And they're not even new content, but stuff they already have in their previous game

 

[Imari]

PD is the only developer that does DLC right these days.

Yes. The only developer that pushes promised content for free and post-release developed content for money. Sure.

Does it get stuffy, living under that rock? You can't possibly be unaware of the main competitor to Gran Turismo, which has followed basically exactly that philosophy, except that they've actually released paid DLC (and in significant quantity too).

 

[LeGeNd-1]

You mean Forza? I don't have an XBox so I haven't been keeping up with their DLC plans, pardon my ignorance. If they do then that's good for them 👍 From what I've read their team is much bigger than PD's though, so it's only expected that they put out more stuff. Still, you get my idea; the number of devs that treat DLC as it should be and not as a cash cow is in the minority.

 

[stpatty]

I've been surprised by the amount of free updated to GT6, and not insubstantial things like the Red Bull Ring, several cars and the Senna challenge (and the cars that go along with that). They could easily have charged a good amount for all of those, so I'm thankful for that. I am genuinely shocked though that people would actively rather paid DLC to what we've had so far, though. Really? You're getting free stuff and you still want to pay for more?

 

[GolimLongshanks]

^^^

Let's just say that I'm not impressed by cheap plastic toys!

 

[Imari]

Still, you get my idea; the number of devs that treat DLC as it should be and not as a cash cow is in the minority.

DLC should be treated as a cash cow, because that's what it is. It's an attempt to cash in on whales who will spend over the odds to get a small amount of content.

However, it's possible to do that AND have a modicum of respect for your customers, which I think is what you're trying to get at.

For example, selling new tracks to users at a price that is a substantial fraction of the whole game price is fine. They're overpriced compared to base game content, but it's new content and the user is free to either buy it or wait for the next installment of the franchise.

Selling rehashed content, as in your example of EA and Codemasters is not fine. Neither is selling credits in games that have obviously had their credit systems gimped to push the purchases, something both T10 and PD are guilty of. Neither is selling needlessly disposable items such as the infamous GT5 Paint Pack.

I think far too many games are seeing the "success" of F2P models and trying to emulate them, ignoring the fact that the player turnover rate on those games is mostly insanely high compared to a high priced purchaseable game. That's OK with F2Ps, because the user doesn't feel hard done by when they give up on an abusive F2P, after all, they paid nothing for it.

It's not OK with off-the-shelf games. These games cannot be based on business models that are designed around accepting that they will drive a certain number of players away from the game. While there's good things to be learned from F2Ps, it's not the parts that most developers seem to be trying so hard to shoehorn into their games.

 

[TonyLomas]

Does anyone really want paid DLC rather than free monthly updates?
I'm guessing the poll is just skewed because people would prefer road cars to concept cars of VGT.
As already pointed out on this thread, there are a few real cars released in the free monthly updates, and I also like the free tracks. The GT5 way of doing it was for people to pay for tracks like Spa, now we are getting them for free.
I doubt that paid DLC would mean that we'd get more cars or tracks made available. I don't think the money generated would go directly to a DLC production team.

 

[NixxxoN]

Im against PAID DLC and all people should be. We pay enough when we buy the game!
Paid DLCs suck for people who wont want to spend so much or cant afford it.


I think this poll is messed up and should be removed or edited.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Im against PAID DLC and all people should be. We pay enough when we buy the game!
Paid DLCs suck for people who wont want to spend so much or cant afford it.

I'm against systems costing money. We should get them for free.

I think this poll is messed up and should be removed or edited.

Good thing the choice isn't up to you, then.

...

Here's another vote for the non-existent "both". Small free updates are obviously welcome, but something like monthly (or even bi-monthly) paid DLC car packs wouldn't bother me. It's not mandatory, and it's the same as paying full price for a game on release versus paying less for it a year later; in a racing game, you're paying for these DLC cars as early access to them compared to waiting for the next installment completely. I know I preferred tossing a dollar PD's way for the Aventador during GT5, instead of waiting until GT6's release to drive it.

 

[NixxxoN]

I'm against systems costing money. We should get them for free.

The difference, as I said, is that we already paid for the game and most of cars/tracks were in GT5 already. I would pay for the GPS layout creator thing as they announced, but I think not for new cars/tracks that come to the game.

Here's another vote for the non-existent "both". Small free updates are obviously welcome, but something like monthly (or even bi-monthly) paid DLC car packs wouldn't bother me. It's not mandatory, and it's the same as paying full price for a game on release versus paying less for it a year later; in a racing game, you're paying for these DLC cars as early access to them compared to waiting for the next installment completely. I know I preferred tossing a dollar PD's way for the Aventador during GT5, instead of waiting until GT6's release to drive it.

Well, in other words, you can afford paying the DLC so you dont care, but there are people who cant really afford the DLCs, and it sucks to divide players in classes. "poorer players have less stuff than richer players". Everyone should be equal.

 

[poumpoum]

Between having nearly nothing (couple of new real cars and 1 track in 9 months...) and having the possibility to pay for new car/track every month if you want, I clearly prefer the DLC.

This is a way to finance content ! Even if you don't want to pay at the time they are released, you will find this tracks and cars in the next iteration of Gran Turismo for "free" ! So IMO let the ones who want more now pay and finance new stuff ! (I only bought the SPA DLC with GT5)

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The difference, as I said, is that we already paid for the game and most of cars/tracks were in GT5 already. I would pay for the GPS layout creator thing as they announced, but I think not for new cars/tracks that come to the game.

Well, in other words, you can afford paying the system + game so you dont care, but there are people who cant really afford the system + game, and it sucks to divide players in classes.

Well, in other words, you can afford paying the DLC so you dont care, but there are people who cant really afford the DLCs, and it sucks to divide players in classes. "poorer players have less stuff than richer players". Everyone should be equal.

I'm against systems costing money. We should get them for free.

 

[NixxxoN]

Are you joking or not? How can systems (machines) be free?

The idea is to either have it all or dont.

The community should not be divided into DLC owners and the rest. I remember I already had those issues in GT5, with the people that I used to play online.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Are you joking or not? How can systems (machines) be free?

I'm taking your flawed logic to its expected end. If "everyone should be equal", people are missing out on not just the DLC, but the entire game.

Why should DLC be free? It is work, that costs time, just like any other part of the game.

The idea is to either have it all or dont.

Why the black and white attitude? If someone is willing to spend the money on DLC, why not give it to them? And how does me buying an Aventador in GT5 suddenly ruin someone elses' experience? It's an optional extra. If it were required to complete the game, then maybe, maybe I could see the argument being put forth.

The community should not be divided into DLC owners and the rest. I remember I already had those issues with the people that I used to play online.

GT actually handles DLC pretty well, insomuch that it includes the DLC cars in the latest updates, so that even if people don't buy the DLC cars themselves, they can at least see them when in online races, instead of some placeholder car.

 

[poumpoum]

The community should not be divided into DLC owners and the rest. I remember I already had those issues with the people that I used to play online.

The community is already divided you know... I will never have 20M of credit (because of time it takes) to buy some cars my friends have and they love to drive them online

 

[TurismoBad]

First of all I don't expect PD's output to be sufficient in order to offer DLC car packs - they simply don't create enough cars to do that. There will be nothing left for GT7 if they offered 50 cars as a DLC throughout the GT6 lifespan.

Anyway - IF they ever decide to offer DLC cars I would like them to be purchasable one by one. Whole pack would obviously be discounted but if there is only one car from the whole pack that interests me I can get it for few euros.

That would also help them understand what type of cars are popular.

 

[Swagger897]

I liked the car packs we got but they could have been better, such as Italian classic cars, muscle cars, etc... However, like @TurismoBad mentioned, if they all were offered separately, I would also like that, as I would pay top dollar for LMP1's and 2's. It is "work" that PD does so they should be paid for.

PD locked themselves into this VGT stuff by presenting it pre-release of the game, so if I purchased it not knowing that we wouldnt have it till weeks later, it should be free (however, the same should be said with all other features that are on the back of the box).

So the poll is correct really.. Pay per car (production cars i.e. Aventador) released on PD's part wholeheartedly, or receive more free VGT and suprise additions (such as TS030).

I do find PD's work ethic to be on par with an amateur app creator, with the communication skills of a chimpanzee pointing at a picture book... More needs to be done other than a blog...

 

[NixxxoN]

GT actually handles DLC pretty well, insomuch that it includes the DLC cars in the latest updates, so that even if people don't buy the DLC cars themselves, they can at least see them when in online races, instead of some placeholder car.

I was talking mainly about the tracks... if you dont own a DLC track you can race there.

Also, if people want to do a one-make race of a DLC car, you cant.

The community is already divided you know... I will never have 20M of credit (because of time it takes) to buy some cars my friends have and they love to drive them online

Do you really have such little time? Thats weird. With the 200% login bonus you can do lots of money repeating the Red Bull events. The main thing is that you can do it without paying any real money, you just need to play.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

DLC should be treated as a cash cow, because that's what it is. It's an attempt to cash in on whales who will spend over the odds to get a small amount of content.

However, it's possible to do that AND have a modicum of respect for your customers, which I think is what you're trying to get at.

For example, selling new tracks to users at a price that is a substantial fraction of the whole game price is fine. They're overpriced compared to base game content, but it's new content and the user is free to either buy it or wait for the next installment of the franchise.

Selling rehashed content, as in your example of EA and Codemasters is not fine. Neither is selling credits in games that have obviously had their credit systems gimped to push the purchases, something both T10 and PD are guilty of. Neither is selling needlessly disposable items such as the infamous GT5 Paint Pack.

I think far too many games are seeing the "success" of F2P models and trying to emulate them, ignoring the fact that the player turnover rate on those games is mostly insanely high compared to a high priced purchaseable game. That's OK with F2Ps, because the user doesn't feel hard done by when they give up on an abusive F2P, after all, they paid nothing for it.

It's not OK with off-the-shelf games. These games cannot be based on business models that are designed around accepting that they will drive a certain number of players away from the game. While there's good things to be learned from F2Ps, it's not the parts that most developers seem to be trying so hard to shoehorn into their games.

Yup, that's exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks for that. I don't mind paying reasonable money for extra content, as long as the content is made after the game is released (so there's no way they could've been on the disc from the start). I just count it as supporting the company. Same reason why I bought premium for GTP. I was initially iffy about the paid credits before GT6 launch, but the in-game economy is totally fine (even better than GT5 if you exclude seasonals) so you don't really need it. I agree the paint pack is stupid, but that's got to do more with the in-game mechanics of single use chips. Now that they've rectified it in GT6 I doubt we'll see the same if there's a Paint Pack 2 released.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I was talking mainly about the tracks... if you dont own a DLC track you can race there.

Also, if people want to do a one-make race of a DLC car, you cant.

So? I haven't paid for the newest Bioshock game, and therefore can't play it. That seems reasonable. If I want to use something, and the company wants to charge money for me to do so, then I either choose to, or don't.

For someone who so strongly supports PD, why would you rather they don't make money?

Do you really have such little time? Thats weird. With the 200% login bonus you can do lots of money repeating the Red Bull events. The main thing is that you can do it without paying any real money, you just need to play.

Today's shocker: not everybody has the same amount of time available to play games. Related story: not everybody wants to grind the same races for days to afford the cars they want to drive.

This is just another example of you expecting others to play the game your way.

 

[NixxxoN]

So? I haven't paid for the newest Bioshock game, and therefore can't play it. That seems reasonable. If I want to use something, and the company wants to charge money for me to do so, then I either choose to, or don't.

For someone who so strongly supports PD, why would you rather they don't make money?

Please stop comparing entire games to paying DLC, it doesnt make sense.
I support PD by buying the games, not the DLC's. The only DLC I bought in GT5 was spa because I love the track, but I mean, paid DLC suck in my opinion. First Too expensive for what they offer, feels like being robbed when you get them, and when you see others enjoy the paid DLC that you dont have, it makes you get angry.

Today's shocker: not everybody has the same amount of time available to play games. Related story: not everybody wants to grind the same races for days to afford the cars they want to drive.

This is just another example of you expecting others to play the game your way.

Of course I know this. But I'm sure, not to the point of NEVER being able to afford a 20 million car. Maybe he doesnt know how to grind efficiently.

 

[sgohsixthree]

Seeing as PD will create the same amount of content at the same rate anyways, I'll say stay free. We'd like to assume that if people are paying for content, they would make more of it and faster. But.. PD.

 

[Imari]

Does anyone really want paid DLC rather than free monthly updates?

If the choice is between paying or not paying for exactly the same content, then of course everyone would prefer that it's free.

The assumption is that if it's paid, then there's a higher quality and/or quantity available. Do you take half a dozen free cars (a al GT6), or do you take 10 cars a month that are paid? Not so clear cut. I would certainly rather have a large quantity of DLC that I needed to pay to access, but I could understand how some people might prefer it a different way.

I was initially iffy about the paid credits before GT6 launch, but the in-game economy is totally fine (even better than GT5 if you exclude seasonals) so you don't really need it.

At release, grinding the most efficient race in GT6 took about 40 hours to earn 20 million credits. 40 hours playtime for one car is messed up. FM5 had similar issues at release, and both games have addressed them to some degree, such that now it's really not so bad.

But don't be fooled into thinking that the first release version of the economy wasn't tweaked to encourage real money purchases. It very much was.

 

[jlmcmillan1978]

Im against PAID DLC and all people should be. We pay enough when we buy the game!
Paid DLCs suck for people who wont want to spend so much or cant afford it.


I think this poll is messed up and should be removed or edited.

I understand where you're coming from but paid DLC done right is an additional and optional extra to what you've already paid for. What we should be getting for free is long overdue bug/glitch fixes like fixing the messed up speedos in the GT500 and the 111R. Promised features like a track creator that they used news of which to push sales, and it's still no-where to be seen. Getting concept cars for free does nothing for fixing what should never have shipped broken, or for that matter, does not bring back things like B-Spec and endurance racing that should never have been taken out.

But what could make the community a little happier is to get a paid DLC option for something extra that they're asking for that was not necessarily promised already. Car and track packs for example. If PD created an $20 pack for the E30 M3, MkIV Supra, RS500 Sierra Cosworth, McLaren P1, and LaFerrari, then I would happily support and pay for it, and many others would too. And I'd prefer it to free concept cars with stupidly large HD videos coming out periodically. As an added bonus, it would serve as acknowledgement that PD is listening to what people are actually asking for, and not just churning out things that people do not necessarily want. These are the top 5 requested cars on GTPlanet and there is still no acknowledgement that PD have noticed that people want them and might be wiling to do something about it.

To simplify, paid DLC for customer requests, free updates for fixing what shouldn't be broken and returning features back to the game that should still be there. Continue with adding extra events (seasonals) occasionally, but for crying out loud add some variety to it instead of the same PP limits, the same challenges, again and again. And continue with this free VGT business if you must PD, clearly there is a commitment to it being a big part of GT6, but I for one find nothing satisfying about getting these fantasy cars for free, when there is no sign of standards being converted to premium or all new premium 'real' cars coming to the game anywhere in sight. Paid or free.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

But don't be fooled into thinking that the first release version of the economy wasn't tweaked to encourage real money purchases. It very much was.

GT5's payouts were also pretty pitiful before login bonus and seasonals came along. PD probably just didn't want people buying all of the top cars within the first few hours of the game being released. They haven't done anything different in this respect. And I have a feeling those who bought credit packs would buy them anyway even if login bonus and RB Challenges were there from the start

 

[Imari]

GT5's payouts were also pretty pitiful before login bonus and seasonals came along. PD probably just didn't want people buying all of the top cars within the first few hours of the game being released.

Poor game design.

There's 1200 cars. Even at 10 hours per 20 million credits no one is going to be buying all the most expensive cars right away. And besides, it's a game about driving cars.

Say you have magical access to every single car in the game from the word go. You drive each one for only five minutes, barely enough to get two laps in at some tracks, not enough for most races. We're ignoring all the time it will take you in menus to change cars and so on, that has magically disappeared.

That is 100 hours of gameplay, right there. Without taking into consideration any special races a player might want to do, or driving a car for more than five minutes.

Why do we need to restrict access to cars so severely again?

There's an argument for restricting access to some degree because it increases attachment. You feel more like the car is yours if you've had to work for it than if it was just given to you. I'm sure somebody, somewhere has done the study on how long is actually needed to feel like you worked for something, but I'll bet it's not 40 hours. I'll bet it's not even 10.

They haven't done anything different in this respect. And I have a feeling those who bought credit packs would buy them anyway even if login bonus and RB Challenges were there from the start

Yes, well. Just because some people have more money than sense, doesn't mean that the release economy wasn't 🤬 up.


Edit: Just watched the video in your sig. I agree so much that it hurts sometimes.