- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
Of dumbest arguments ever made on this forum, this takes the cake.
All I've been trying to say this whole time is that claiming that the updates are not "free" and that they are "no additional cost" completely undermines what is meant when people say the updates are "free". At no point did I say that you couldn't complain about the content provided.
There certainly seems to be an obtuse individual in this conversation.
Swear fuelled? Where? Your interpretation of 🤬 is not my interpretation of 🤬. Or are you the grand arbiter of 🤬's meaning now?
There is a fundamental (that means very important) difference between the two, especially when "its free" (as in "its free, stop complaining") is used to try to stop people from expressing their complaints about something they've paid for. Understand that fundamental difference is key to understanding why it is wrong for people to attempt to shut down other peoples complaints.
I think it would be high time for you to take a break from the computer and relax.
Who are you, my dad? Fairly certain you're not, and he stopped being able to tell me what to do a loooooooong time ago.
AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH YOU/WE HAVE PAID FOR IT. THE COST, TO PD FOR THE CREATION OF THE UPDATES, IS BUDGETED FOR AND COVERED BY PD's INCOME; THE MONEY WE ALL PAID FOR THE GAME! THIS IS NOT DIFFICULT! WE ARE NOT GETTING SOMETHING FOR FREE. WE MAY NOT PAYING FOR IT AT THE POINT OF THE UPDATES RELEASE, BUT IT IS PAID FOR; ERGO "NO ADDITIONAL COST" NOT "FREE".
So what you're saying is its a free update to a game we already bought. So if I got GTS as a gift as an example, I would be getting the updates doubly free or absolute free because I didn't even buy the game myself.
We heard you.
No, just a guy who's wishing your silliness would just stop because whatever you're saying right now is not only the dumbest thing I have read in years, but also the most pointless thing that has ever been said in the GTS forums, so far at least.
r/iamverybadass
In my case it WAS free. I was gifted the game and PS4. Polyphony also paid for my house and are paying my utilities and internet bill. I truly have experienced “FREE”. Thank you Sony and Polyphony.
— but that doesn't mean I can only be glowing and thankful.Speak for yourself. You agreed to purchase Gran Turismo Sport in the state that it was in at the time of your specific purchase. That makes any additional content that is added to the game a 'bonus' that you didn't not have to pay for. In short, anyone who owned the game before this update is receiving the update for free, and anyone who now buys the game after the update is paying for the update as well as all previous content.
Look, your lack of comprehension is not my problem. Stop trying to project your deficiencies on me; I'm not the one unable to understand very simple concepts.
Yes. Of course they did. Sony/PD will have a rough idea of when initial sales slow down and when they need to encourage further sale through discounting.but i bought it on sale. highly discounted. did they account for that?
I'm aware of what the text in the video says, I even referred to it earlier:
*slightly altered for clarity
The vast majority of updates will be planned; some will not be (like after the complaints due to a lack of GT League) but most will be. No bean counter (from Sony) would allow PD to keep chipping away at profits willy-nilly unless there is a damned good reason (the complaints about the lack of GT League being a prime example of a good reason; and its those kind of unplanned things that eat into profits). Using statistics and previous experience Sony/PD will work out, ahead of time, how much the game is going to cost to make (including planned updates), what sales they are likely to achieve, and, more importantly, the profits they are likely to make (once costs have been deducted), and how long all of that will take. Thats how (the vast majority of) products live and die. Thats how decisions to even make the product in the first place are made. No responsible company (and Sony has to be responsible with their projections as I believe under US law Sony has a legal duty of care to create profit for its shareholders) makes any product without first having a damned good idea of those figures; in layman's terms... a business plan. Just because PD have been going for 20 odd years, with some considerable success, doesn't mean they get to escape a bean counters due diligence!
To a certain (very small) degree I would agree but that doesn't make it factually correct; its because marketing wonks have managed to convince people that not-actually-free is free that we find ourselves having these kinds of arguments.
Yet this is exactly where it starts.
And they, generally, do it precisely because the contents didn't come with a (visible) price. Its not for nought that I have said, over and over again, that people use "its free, stop complaining". But thank you, this is precisely the point I was trying to make, and why I felt it was necessary to explain the fundamental difference between "free" and "no additional charge". All I was trying to do is explain why "its free" is a fallacy and therefore why it is wrong for people to use it in an attempt to shut other peoples opinions down (which you acknowledge happens).
Yes. And now that you, an administrator, have also said it hopefully people will start to believe it and finally stop using the "its free, stop complaining" method of shutting down criticism (or belittling others opinions).
Indeed. But similarly, that update wasn't actually free either. (Sorry, I couldn't help myself, I'm just messing with you!Apple pushes updates to my iPhone periodically — sometimes with new features, sometimes even working!
)You're talking about "feels" now and while "feels" do go some way to creating extra revenue, creating those "feels" has costs and those costs have to be met one way or another, even if its a bit further down the line.
Its still not free. If the assets are to be used across the "next GT game or 2" then the development costs are being shared across all the titles in which they will be used (or at least enabling cost cutting on following titles)... it all depends how the accountants want to slice and dice it across the books. Think of it in terms of an actual car manufacturer sharing development costs of a platform with another manufacturer, only PD is sharing manufacturing costs across titles with itself.
I can only assume thats aimed at me (even though I have emphatically not been "complain[ing] about the dlc not being technically free", I've been explaining why it isn't free... I know, I know, complaining, explaining, they both end in "laining" its difficult but are actually two very different things). Anyway, to answer your question:
But ya did get the game included in a bundle probably at or close to the price of just a barebones console tho...eh?eh?
You are making a huge assumption here, and that is that you know how PD are covering the costs of developing this DLC. The bottom line is we do not know how the costs are being recovered, Sony might be covering them from console sales, they might have been factored into GT Sports original development costs, they might be factored into the next GT games development costs if the assets being developed are high enough quality and compatible. We do not know where these costs are being covered and there are far more ways they can be covered. We don't even know if there is even an intenton to recover them. And before you say "OMG companies have to make a profit" overall they do, but companies, particularly larger ones will gladly make a loss on a product rather than a profit at times and there are legitimate business reasons for this which you do seem to be aware of. If you want to discuss business however this is not the thread for it.
You have a right to say what you want as long as it's not offensive to anyone. You have a right to compalin, you have a right to believe what you want about the DLC, you can beleive it cost you the full £60 asking price if you want. That's your right.
Agreed, if Sony have anytinhg about them, they will be analysing the sale charts and they will have had forcasts and a plan. BTW I owned a business, these days I magage a department for a large accounting and payroll firm.
This is where you really fall apart, free means without cost or without payment, free is relative. To deny the logic of free being relative to each person you are in effect saying that free is an impossible paradaox and the word has no place in general speech and it is something that no one will ever experience. You see if you want to be anal about something, everything has a cost, be it time and effort or money, everything costs something. So if we want to really get daft about this, let's say nothing in the world, life, history, has ever been free.The vast majority of updates will be planned; some will not be (like after the complaints due to a lack of GT League) but most will be. No bean counter (from Sony) would allow PD to keep chipping away at profits willy-nilly unless there is a damned good reason (the complaints about the lack of GT League being a prime example of a good reason; and its those kind of unplanned things that eat into profits). Using statistics and previous experience Sony/PD will work out, ahead of time, how much the game is going to cost to make (including planned updates), what sales they are likely to achieve, and, more importantly, the profits they are likely to make (once costs have been deducted), and how long all of that will take. Thats how (the vast majority of) products live and die. Thats how decisions to even make the product in the first place are made. No responsible company (and Sony has to be responsible with their projections as I believe under US law Sony has a legal duty of care to create profit for its shareholders) makes any product without first having a damned good idea of those figures; in layman's terms... a business plan. Just because PD have been going for 20 odd years, with some considerable success, doesn't mean they get to escape a bean counters due diligence!
~~~~~~~~~~~
As an aside, for the sake of balance, I must acknowledge that the console itself is a different story; as we all (should) know for the majority of its sales life the console is a loss-leader. The reason I mention this is not only to acknowledge that their are ways to make profits from losses, but to also highlight that Gran Turismo has to make a profit; it, and all the other games on the platform, are the reason Sony are able to sell the console at a loss yet ultimately make a profit from the whole scheme. A loss-leader infinite loop would not make a terribly good business plan. Anyway, I digress...
To a certain (very small) degree I would agree but that doesn't make it factually correct; its because marketing wonks have managed to convince people that not-actually-free is free that we find ourselves having these kinds of arguments.
Yet this is exactly where it starts.
And they, generally, do it precisely because the contents didn't come with a (visible) price. Its not for nought that I have said, over and over again, that people use "its free, stop complaining". But thank you, this is precisely the point I was trying to make, and why I felt it was necessary to explain the fundamental difference between "free" and "no additional charge". All I was trying to do is explain why "its free" is a fallacy and therefore why it is wrong for people to use it in an attempt to shut other peoples opinions down (which you acknowledge happens).
Explaining why one thing is wrong required explaining why another thing, the root cause of the first thing, is also wrong. (if you get what I mean). Perhaps this was too confusing for some?
Yes. And now that you, an administrator, have also said it hopefully people will start to believe it and finally stop using the "its free, stop complaining" method of shutting down criticism (or belittling others opinions).
This is no criticism of you, or any other administrator, moderator, or management, but the whole "its free, stop complaining" thing should have been stamped out a long time ago. I dunno, maybe you guys have previously tried to stamp it out but, from my experience, with many users being as stubborn as they are, the fallacy rampantly persists?
Indeed. But similarly, that update wasn't actually free either. (Sorry, I couldn't help myself, I'm just messing with you!
You're talking about "feels" now and while "feels" do go some way to creating extra revenue, creating those "feels" has costs and those costs have to be met one way or another, even if its a bit further down the line.
Never has "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink" been so true. You're right, PD has no responsibility to release new content, unless they want to. If they want to, and they obviously do because they are, then the costs have to be recovered from somewhere. I'm not going through all this again.
Its still not free. If the assets are to be used across the "next GT game or 2" then the development costs are being shared across all the titles in which they will be used (or at least enabling cost cutting on following titles)... it all depends how the accountants want to slice and dice it across the books. Think of it in terms of an actual car manufacturer sharing development costs of a platform with another manufacturer, only PD is sharing manufacturing costs across titles with itself.
I can only assume thats aimed at me (even though I have emphatically not been "complain[ing] about the dlc not being technically free", I've been explaining why it isn't free... I know, I know, complaining, explaining, they both end in "laining" its difficult but are actually two very different things). Anyway, to answer your question:
View attachment 793329
- Day 1.
- Full Price.
- Limited edition GT console (inc. game).
