- 3,461
- Melbourne
I noticed it too. No factory spec r34 has a V-motor.
The Crew: Wild Run Edition
- Thread starter DDastardly00
- 3,111 comments
- 174,161 views
- 15,319
- TRAPPIST-1g
- ProjectWHaT
It'll be weirder for middle and rear engined cars. 
- 2,187
- Kansas City
- PsuPepperoni
bluemoon_19
Premium
- 1,173
- England, Yorkshire
- bluemoon_19
Season Pass trailer is out:
Looks like all of the planned contents are ready at this point. Is there any developer left that doesn't hold back content at release for "DLC" these days?
This mad me a bit angry with them showing off that all the content is ready the game hasn't even gone gold yet and it looks like this stuff is all ready to go. Bit of a silly move I think should at least keep the content under wraps till a month or so after release.
- 13,746
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Looks like all of the planned contents are ready at this point. Is there any developer left that doesn't hold back content at release for "DLC" these days?
Only stupid ones.
Why exactly should a developer put more content in the game at release than it takes to sell it? They're far better off keeping it for post-release. If they want goodwill, they can give it away for free, or if they want cash they can sell it.
If you've got a reason why they'd be better putting that in the base game other than "but I want more stuff" then I'd love to hear it.
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,258
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
It's not stupid. It's respect for your customers.
Reason 1: The content is already good to go.
Reason 2: The price of the Season Pass is not justified if you compare it to the price of the base game and the content you get.
Reason 3: It's just pure greed on their part.
It's not "I want more stuff". It's "I don't want stuff that's already there taken away and resold at a ridiculous price".
But hey, I understand that development costs are getting more and more expensive these days. So anything goes as long as it makes you $$$.
We've debated quite heatedly on this topic in the past, so let's agree to disagree and just leave this here.
Last edited:
- 13,746
- Adelaide
- Neomone
And they should give it to you for free why?
So don't buy it.
They clearly think that they can make more money by selling it separately at that price, so they're doing what companies are designed to do. Any company that doesn't take the actions that ultimately make them the most money is stupid.
Pretty much all DLC is a terrible deal compared to the base game. That's how the economics of DLC has turned out: the optimal pricing strategy appears to be to price it fairly high. It sucks a bit for those that can't afford it or don't think it's decent value, but it is what it is.
You're aware of what companies are put together for, right? There are a few companies out there that exist to make people happy and don't give two hoots whether they make money or not, but they're fairly rare. I don't think it's too controversial to say that the vast majority of companies want to make money. That is their purpose, and anything and everything they do should ultimately be able to be traced to that goal.
You seem to think that just because they could give you more value for your money that they should. Because it would be better for you.
You're completely ignoring that it would be worse for them.
It's the companies job to do what is best for themselves, and sell the game in a fashion that meets their goals best.
It's your job to do what is best for you, including deciding whether or not purchasing a product meets with your personal standards for value. A person who earns $100 a month has very different standards to a person who earn $10,000 a month.
So of course it's greed. That's not a reason not to do it. That's the reason to do it in the first place.
And I don't agree to disagree. I think you're just wrong, and if you ever happen to end up in charge of a company you'll see just how different it is when you're on the other side of the fence. You've still failed to give me any reasons why they should give you the content for free that don't devolve to "because I want it".
Look at it from the company's perspective, and give me a positive outcome for them that results from them putting the content in at release. They may or may not sell more copies, but that would then be balanced against the money that they may or may not have made selling DLC. I imagine smart people figured out what was optimal from past experience and went for that. So assuming that Ubisoft has done their math, what advantage to them would you expect that would make them want to put that content in the base game?
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,258
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
Good thing I have no interest running a company then. I understand some degree of evil is required to survive. People need to make money to live after all. But there is a line where it becomes too much. You seem to have no problem with how far companies can take this. I do and I wish it would stop getting worse and worse every year. I don't think either of us are clearly right or wrong as there are always 2 sides to everything in life. So, for the second time, let's draw a line and call it a day eh?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note, InsideSimRacing has posted their impressions of The Crew using a wheel. On hardcore mode and cockpit view the physics doesn't look that bad, but probably it's because the guy isn't driving particularly fast to expose the physics deficiencies (he failed the challenges a couple of times in the video). I don't blame him though, for someone used to playing sims going to an arcade game can be like playing a whole different genre
You gotta wonder why they started reviewing non-sims like Horizon, Driveclub and The Crew though. Probably a channel name change is in order. InsideAnyRacing perharps? 💡
- 13,746
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Did you miss this bit, or just choose to ignore it completely?
==========
Why is making money evil?
For that matter, why is choosing to sell your labour for the highest price that the market will support evil?
Hell, let's get straight to the point and question why on earth you would say that "some degree of evil is required to survive"? What does that mean, and where are you getting the reasoning for that from?
Incorrect. I simply think that the problem is self-regulating.
The companies have to be able to make enough money to cover their costs and enough profit to please their shareholders. To do that they have to make a game that pleases enough players that it sells X number of copies at Y price.
There are and will always be companies that try to push things too far. And they will fail, because they're not providing enough value to the customer. Maybe this is one of those.
But it's not evil, it's people trying to do their best.
Ah, is this the old "I'm entitled to my opinion" argument? You're not. You're entitled to what you can defend, and so far your defense has been "But it's eeeeevil".
You can if you like. I'm quite happy here pointing out the flaws in your quote unquote reasoning.
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
- 4,221
- Louisville, KY
- ukfan758
I'm really looking forward for the game but I don't understand why the developers would be stupid enough to require you to be online even though you install the entire game onto your system (meaning it's not a stream game). This means more servers would have to be used which means more money, it's illogical.
- 2,187
- Kansas City
- PsuPepperoni
- 13,746
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Because I wished to refute the incorrect points made in the post.
He doesn't get to just say whatever he likes and then stifle all reply by saying "agree to disagree". I do not agree to disagree, and I wished to make my reasons for disagreement clear to all reading the discussion. Something that Legend never did, unless you count "but it's evil" as a clear reason.
There was no "disagreeing for the sake of it", as you put it. I believe I have clearly stated my reasons why I disagree, and if you do not understand then I'm happy to explain them to you further.
- 874
- Australia
Couldn't agree more. I was mad they didn't include the '69 Torino GT Fastback, let alone why there's 2 Corvettes in the Vintage Car Pack? Also, since when is the Spyker C8 Aileron considered a 'Vintage' car? It's only like 10 years old if my memory is correct.
Also, it seems the SL63 AMG, S7 and Touareg are now believed to be DLC (despite having been seen in trailers/gameplay prior to the season pass announcement/trailer).
- 21,262
- United States
That is in the "Extreme" pack with the Aston Martin Zagato.
They weren't very good with transitioning between the packs in that trailer.
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
What, someone disagrees with you and they are automatically incorrect for the reasons you suggested in your previous post? Why not accept that you both have a different viewpoint on the matter - because company pricing policy and profit needs (based on my experience working for a variety of companies from small to mega-huge) happen to be nowhere near as black-and-white as you seem to be suggesting.
Opinions are also (apparently) the right of the individual - and as you have said in the past, this is an opinion site, and people should be allowed to voice those, so I don't see why this is any different.
Sure, some examples will fit either viewpoint, but many will not - so I return to my point, why not honour that understanding which legend suggested?
Anyway, straying back on-topic; regarding the 'was it ready, or not?' situation it definitely seems suspect...but as I said I really wasn't interested in the game after trying it, so I should probably not be posting on the subject.
- 1,971
- Seattle, WA
I doubt all the content of each pack is ready, the trailer is still pretty vague on what will come with each pack, I think they are showing what they have now and that's it.
- 2,884
- Near Reading, Uk
- JohnSchoonsBeard
As long as there are enough cars included in the game to play it properly that should be enough. Often these extra cars wouldn't get made available if there wasn't the chance to sell them as DLC.
Some customers who are willing to pay for the extra content get some level of perceived value. Those who don't want to pay for the DLC ultimately get the choice to have the basic game at a cheaper price than if the game featured all the content. Not having the extra content rarely makes a huge difference to how the game plays.
As for the physics and the Inside SIM Racing review, I too played it with a wheel, clutch and h shifter. I thought their review was pretty fair. Once wheel and control settings were adjusted it drove pretty well. It did need a lot of adjustment of said settings and that's something that needs to be improved for launch. I'm not sure if I could care about all the "missions" but as a simple driving exercise it felt pretty good.
Some customers who are willing to pay for the extra content get some level of perceived value. Those who don't want to pay for the DLC ultimately get the choice to have the basic game at a cheaper price than if the game featured all the content. Not having the extra content rarely makes a huge difference to how the game plays.
As for the physics and the Inside SIM Racing review, I too played it with a wheel, clutch and h shifter. I thought their review was pretty fair. Once wheel and control settings were adjusted it drove pretty well. It did need a lot of adjustment of said settings and that's something that needs to be improved for launch. I'm not sure if I could care about all the "missions" but as a simple driving exercise it felt pretty good.
- 13,746
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Nope. I explained my viewpoint and invited Legend to explain the reasoning behind his. He refused, citing "always two sides to an argument". The closest he came at any point was "but it's evil", which is no explanation at all.
I believe he's incorrect for the reasons I pointed out. If he or anyone else would like to point out the reasons that I am incorrect then please do so, but I'm not going to shut up just because you say so.
Because I'd like to understand at least how someone else has arrived at their different opinion. If they're not willing to share how they've arrived at their opinion, I'm going to assume that the reasoning is either faulty or absent.
And as I've said in this very thread, you're entitled to the opinions that you can defend. Simply saying "the sky is mauve" is not an opinion, it's just daft. However if you then explain why you think the sky is mauve, then some interesting discussion can be had.
Because there's no understanding. I don't understand his point, and until he can provide some sound reasoning to back it up I see no reason why I shouldn't continue to ask questions.
- 3,461
- Melbourne
Perhaps he doesn't feel he has to explain his opinion.
- 1,334
- PST/US
- HarrisonMV1Ford
- DK Harrison
Not sure why people are hating. Compared to most games these days the Season Pass seems to have great content 👍 Excited for December 2nd already.
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
May I direct you to the below...
Those look like reasons to me, and ones that are pretty self-explainatory.
However, you keep picking up and returning to the "but, it's evil" comment, which Legend never actually said, not unless you twist the first bolded part quoted below.
Now there is another reason, both lucid and valid and so by your own reasoning, there it should have stopped.
That was funny but unfortunately just a little naive.
Sorry, once more a bit too sweeping to be taken seriously. There are countless examples of people 'trying to do their best' no matter what their financial needs, and considering that certain levels of profit do not come without cost-cutting and 'special deals' over the heads of the workforce and/or suppliers' workforce(s) then that would seem to equate to the 'some degree of evil is required' comment.
I pulled those last two quotes of yours out because to me it implies that you have a particular perspective concerning the matter and Legend has another, both of you have explained them sufficiently for it to be clear that those viewpoints are different. So, outside of a debating society, is there any point in continuing further with that discussion, certainly once both parties have stated their case and defended it to the first level of reasoning?
I think not; Legend, by the looks of it also thought not.
