Get Two Rally Porsches When You Preorder Gravel

Brend

Premium
11,739
Scotland
Scotland
UB3R-BR3NDAGE
ClassicBrend
Since I wait for any reason to plug Shox, here is said 959 on the cover of the game:

shox.jpg
 
347
United Kingdom
Suffolk
jayottsel
Looks like it could be very cool glad its also in the season pass so people on the fence can wait for reviews :)
 
563
Italy
Italy
"This is arguably how a preorder bonus should work; you’ll get the pack free for ordering early – not hold it ransom over those who don’t"

Well said 👍
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92
How in the name of **** is this a good thing? The content is being cut from the finished product in order to make an extra buck. The worst kind of DLC.

Guaranteed that I won't buy the game now.

Here's hoping the game flops horribly. Pre-order bonuses are ridiculous.

Edited due to mistaken the game and dev for another.
 
Last edited:
563
Italy
Italy
How in the name of **** is this a good thing? The content is being cut from the finished product in order to make an extra buck. The worst kind of DLC.

Didn't expect this from former Evolution, but then again, they did come under Codemaster, a decidedly awful company. Guaranteed that I won't buy the game now.

Here's hoping the game flops horribly.
What do you mean? Gravel is developed by Milestone.
 
12,305
Australia
Adelaide
GTP_Imari
Is it wrong that I spent most of the trailer thinking about how silly it is to have your driving lights obscured by the top of the bull bar?
 
3,177
England
St helens, merseyside, England.
crazybuttocks198
Crazybuttocks19
How in the name of **** is this a good thing? The content is being cut from the finished product in order to make an extra buck. The worst kind of DLC.

Guaranteed that I won't buy the game now.

Here's hoping the game flops horribly. Pre-order bonuses are ridiculous.

Edited due to mistaken the game and dev for another.

This is the world we live in now most games now come with additional content
 
1,051
United Kingdom
London
JohnsonCapote
'The Porsche Rally Pack DLC will be offered to those who preorder but it won’t be held exclusively to this condition. Both Porsches will also be included in the Gravel Season Pass. This is arguably how a preorder bonus should work; you’ll get the pack free for ordering early – not hold it ransom over those who don’t.'

I'm still largely opposed to pre-order bonuses and release-day DLC for a multitude of very valid reasons, but if you're going to do it this sounds like a more tolerable way.
 
How in the name of **** is this a good thing? The content is being cut from the finished product in order to make an extra buck. The worst kind of DLC.

Guaranteed that I won't buy the game now.

Here's hoping the game flops horribly. Pre-order bonuses are ridiculous.

Edited due to mistaken the game and dev for another.
Wouldn't you rather the pre order sales flop than the game? We don't want the racing genre to become a risk for devs.
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92
Wouldn't you rather the pre order sales flop than the game? We don't want the racing genre to become a risk for devs.

There will always be an inherent risk when making an entertainment product. It's not something that is exclusive to the racing genre, and while the genre might not be as popular as casual shooters, it's far from a niche market.

Any studio that withholds content at release just to make an extra buck or as incentive to pre-order, thus punishing people who might want to see if the game is utter trash before buying it, deserves to fail and fold.
 
7,696
United Kingdom
Wreckage, Turn 1
PrecisionXCIV
Any studio that withholds content at release just to make an extra buck or as incentive to pre-order, thus punishing people who might want to see if the game is utter trash before buying it, deserves to fail and fold.

I can't say I agree with that logic for a number of reasons. First of all there is the economic aspect of it; Games cost a lot more to develop than they did 10 years ago but prices for a vanilla AAA game have stayed largely the same, so developers need to recoup the costs somehow. Moreover, the people in these studios are talented individuals who rely on the success of this project to make ends meet in their life - Wishing that to be taken away because you feel you are entitled to more content in a digital entertainment product makes it seem like you are playing God for a rather trivial reason.

From the racing fans perspective, it is also worth noting this segment is on thin ice. Racing games are far more of a niche and finding quality racing games from small studios is getting increasingly difficult. If I see an arcade racing game which I believe has good prospects for entertainment, I'd be happy to support the title and the future of the genre.
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92
I can't say I agree with that logic for a number of reasons. First of all there is the economic aspect of it; Games cost a lot more to develop than they did 10 years ago but prices for a vanilla AAA game have stayed largely the same, so developers need to recoup the costs somehow. Moreover, the people in these studios are talented individuals who rely on the success of this project to make ends meet in their life - Wishing that to be taken away because you feel you are entitled to more content in a digital entertainment product makes it seem like you are playing God for a rather trivial reason.

From the racing fans perspective, it is also worth noting this segment is on thin ice. Racing games are far more of a niche and finding quality racing games from small studios is getting increasingly difficult. If I see an arcade racing game which I believe has good prospects for entertainment, I'd be happy to support the title and the future of the genre.

What makes you think games have suddenly become more expensive to make? The systems are easier to make games for than ever, and the amount of consumers have risen greatly in the 21th century. If you look at the most expensive games, most of their budget was spent on advertisement, not development. Modelling and animation requires more work, but the tools to do these things have improved dramatically too.

And it's not extra content. It's content that is ready on release, on the disc you buy, locked behind an additional paywall. Imagine when this extends to the final level in a single player campaign. Pre-orders get the full content, the rest, who might want to wait for reviews first, have to pay a premium to unlock what is already on the disc. It's entirely inexcusable.

And we still have plenty of racing games coming out yearly. Perhaps not as many as in the ps2 days, but that is a given, as only a select few franchises can hope to establish a foothold in the genre. This applies to every genre, but perhaps especially within racing, as there is only so much you can do to change the formula. Other genres benefit from being able to distinguish themselves from the rest via story and characters.
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92

You'll have to excuse me for not taking anything coming from an EA owned studio at face value. Besides, he fails to go into even the tiniest details on what is making games more expensive. Could it be that spending 1-200 percent of your dev budget on marketing is excessive? Is the game properly focused, or does it contain a ton of superfluous bs that no one wants? Is focusing on creating 4K assets really necessary, when so few have the hardware to genuinely take advantage of it?

In any case, if the situation is as directed as some would make it seem, locking away content that is on the disc just to make an additional 5-10 dollars on probably just a relatively few number of sales won't save your company. However, being smarter about how the budget is spent, might just.
 

Northstar

The Original Party Worm
Premium
23,491
United States
Anoka, MN
RokkitShipp
I can't even blame developers for DLC, pre-order bonuses and miscrotransactions. That's not to say I like them, but at the end of the day they are companies and all 3 of those methods have proven successful.If you want to blame anyone, blame your fellow gamers.

It's like being mad at Apple for charging so much for their products when clearly the people actually buying the products have no problem with it.

Could it be that spending 1-200 percent of your dev budget on marketing is excessive?

Is it really all that excessive?

As you pointed out, games are easier to make than ever. Which means there are more people/companies making games which means more competition. That in turn means companies have to spend more in order to get noticed.

Just go on whatever system you have and scroll through the complete list of available games and take note of how many you've never even heard of.
 

Brend

Premium
11,739
Scotland
Scotland
UB3R-BR3NDAGE
ClassicBrend
How in the name of **** is this a good thing? The content is being cut from the finished product in order to make an extra buck. The worst kind of DLC.

Guaranteed that I won't buy the game now.

Here's hoping the game flops horribly. Pre-order bonuses are ridiculous.

Edited due to mistaken the game and dev for another.
So, I'm just curious...do you wear the morality hat for games you had no intention of buying or for all games, like the one in your avatar?

I hate pre-order bonuses too but to wish ill on a title and its developer just seems wreckless.
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92
I can't even blame developers for DLC, pre-order bonuses and miscrotransactions. That's not to say I like them, but at the end of the day they are companies and all 3 of those methods have proven successful.If you want to blame anyone, blame your fellow gamers.

It's like being mad at Apple for charging so much for their products when clearly the people actually buying the products have no problem with it.



Is it really all that excessive?

As you pointed out, games are easier to make than ever. Which means there are more people/companies making games which means more competition. That in turn means companies have to spend more in order to get noticed.

Just go on whatever system you have and scroll through the complete list of available games and take note of how many you've never even heard of.

I don't agree that the companies are entirely without blame. Yes, their primary function is to make money, but there's a fine line between fair and unfair business practice. I do, however, agree that consumers who support these practices hold the majority of the responsibility.

And yes, spending hundreds of millions on marketing is excessive. Especially when dealing with an already well established franchise that releases yearly. While it's easier to get lost in the crowd than ever, it's also easier to reach out to a large audience than ever before.
 

Northstar

The Original Party Worm
Premium
23,491
United States
Anoka, MN
RokkitShipp
but there's a fine line between fair and unfair business practice.

With exceptions of some microtransactions I don't really see anything unfair about any of those practices though as they are all in plain view. If you get caught off guard by pre-order bonuses or DLC that's on you for not doing your research.

And yes, spending hundreds of millions on marketing is excessive. Especially when dealing with an already well established franchise that releases yearly.

I'm going to answer this with a quiz question.

How much money does Coca-Cola spend annually on marketing?

Believe it or not they spent 3.3 Billion dollars in 2013 just on marketing.

And they are much more well-known than any video game company.

it's also easier to reach out to a large audience than ever before.

And how do they accomplish that?
 

Jawehawk

Premium
4,647
Denmark
Denmark
Yohansen_92
So, I'm just curious...do you wear the morality hat for games you had no intention of buying or for all games, like the one in your avatar?

I hate pre-order bonuses too but to wish ill on a title and its developer just seems wreckless.

You're comparing a trivial skin with no actual gameplay ramifications to Gravel which uses two very iconic cars as bait to lure people in before reviewers have a chance to tear the game apart, as well as to make a quick extra buck. The comparison simply does not hold up to scrutiny. Even less so considering that, judging by the names of the two pre-order skins in Bloodborne, they are not actually exclusive to pre-ordering. I didn't pre-order the game, and I know where to find both those Messenger skins in-game, assuming of course that they are not somehow different skins sharing the same names as the ones I am referring to. But again, there's a difference between trivial visual additions, and actual gameplay ones.

I was originally very hyped for the first Project Cars, and planned to buy it, but reversed that decision when their pre-order BS surfaced. So I do certainly let it effect my purchasing choices.


With exceptions of some microtransactions I don't really see anything unfair about any of those practices though as they are all in plain view. If you get caught off guard by pre-order bonuses or DLC that's on you for not doing your research.
I'm going to answer this with a quiz question.

How much money does Coca-Cola spend annually on marketing?

Believe it or not they spent 3.3 Billion dollars in 2013 just on marketing.

And they are much more well-known than any video game company.
And how do they accomplish that?


What a time to be alive when you're not even entitled the content that you've paid for... Gaming sure has changed.

So Cola wastes a ton of money. It's not news to anyone that a lot of large companies waste money. You think people will suddenly stop drinking Coca Cola if they no longer saw the product on TV? Does anyone actually give a 🤬 if the person presenting a product is a celebrity, or can we save a lot of money there?

There are several massive game conferences throughout year where companies can show off their games. I doubt having a booth is free, but I reckon, without knowing for sure, that the price is advantageous. Then there's the plethora of free online sites where you can upload videos, and forums where you can spread the word. In any case, I am not knowledgeable enough about advertisement to properly argue against it, nor is it relevant to the thread. All I can say is that I don't believe the return investment offsets such high marketing costs.


By not spending money, apparently.

No. But there is such a thing as spending more than what you get in return as a result of that spending.
 

Brend

Premium
11,739
Scotland
Scotland
UB3R-BR3NDAGE
ClassicBrend
You're comparing a trivial skin with no actual gameplay ramifications to Gravel which uses two very iconic cars as bait to lure people in before reviewers have a chance to tear the game apart, as well as to make a quick extra buck. The comparison simply does not hold up to scrutiny. Even less so considering that, judging by the names of the two pre-order skins in Bloodborne, they are not actually exclusive to pre-ordering. I didn't pre-order the game, and I know where to find both those Messenger skins in-game, assuming of course that they are not somehow different skins sharing the same names as the ones I am referring to. But again, there's a difference between trivial visual additions, and actual gameplay ones.

I was originally very hyped for the first Project Cars, and planned to buy it, but reversed that decision when their pre-order BS surfaced. So I do certainly let it effect my purchasing choices.





What a time to be alive when you're not even entitled the content that you've paid for... Gaming sure has changed.

So Cola wastes a ton of money. It's not news to anyone that a lot of large companies waste money. You think people will suddenly stop drinking Coca Cola if they no longer saw the product on TV? Does anyone actually give a 🤬 if the person presenting a product is a celebrity, or can we save a lot of money there?

There are several massive game conferences throughout year where companies can show off their games. I doubt having a booth is free, but I reckon, without knowing for sure, that the price is advantageous. Then there's the plethora of free online sites where you can upload videos, and forums where you can spread the word. In any case, I am not knowledgeable enough about advertisement to properly argue against it, nor is it relevant to the thread. All I can say is that I don't believe the return investment offsets such high marketing costs.




No. But there is such a thing as spending more than what you get in return as a result of that spending.
Ah, so those skins may have simply been 'early access' affairs, my mistake. 👍

Even still though, these two Porsches appear to have been classified as DLC first and then added for pre-order incentive. I'd rather that than the other way around, which was the point I brought up in the article. Today's industry shows these incentives are successful, the best way to stand against it is to simply vote with your wallet or at least hold out for reviews. This content will still be available either way.

Like you say, I don't think this will 'make or break' the company, so wishing ill on the devs and title just seems a bit brash! At least we'll have some Porsche on launch day, which wasn't the case not too long ago for any game (or certain series keeping it behind a paid DLC wall in its entirety).

Also worth noting that Gravel appears to be a cut price title, with most places RRP'ing it for £39.99.