Glickenhaus Says Its Cars Won't Appear in Gran Turismo Unless Sony Pays "a Fair Royalty"
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 176 comments
- 16,256 views
- 16,411
- United Kingdom
- 12,700
- Seattle-ish
The article I sited mentions that, pointing out that the Activision case passed the Rogers Test, allowing the use of trademarked names in works of art without needing to pay a royalty or licensing fee. But I also agree with Tornado:
- 4,500
- Australia
I don't see any issue here.
TonyJZX
(Banned)
- 3,945
- Australia
There's frankly a lof of cars that people dont have a huge connection to and most people could take it or leave it.
Look at the wide swath of VGTs.... this is a different thing to Lexus Toyota and Mitsubishi who werent in say Horizon 4 to a degree,,, or Porsche up until very recently in Gran Turismo.
I would personally like it if companies like Rebellion Racing Jackie Chan Oreca from recent Le Mans were here but many people have no affinity to modern prototypes so...
Look at the wide swath of VGTs.... this is a different thing to Lexus Toyota and Mitsubishi who werent in say Horizon 4 to a degree,,, or Porsche up until very recently in Gran Turismo.
I would personally like it if companies like Rebellion Racing Jackie Chan Oreca from recent Le Mans were here but many people have no affinity to modern prototypes so...
- 9
- United States
Whole thing reeks of a company that doesn't have a public relations team, public or private. A proper response to a fan saying "I want their car in my favorite game!" should be "We have nothing on the table at the moment" or "We're working but have nothing to report right now" and not...trying to use your fans as financial ammo.
As a layman, Radical makes the same looking cars anyways.
As a layman, Radical makes the same looking cars anyways.
- 5,421
- Paint booth
- FMecha_EXE
- 1,622
- Mass UTC-5
- HugoStiglitz_420 and GTP_HugoStiglitz
The thing is, if much smaller games can afford his "fee", then there's no reason PD shouldn't. What I don't understand is why Lotus isn't in GT anymore. That's the most egregious BS. PAY THEM WHAT THEY WANT PD!!! And get Classic Lotus in too!!!!! (Lotus 49, 72, 79, etc.)
Also, why do ZERO sims have the Brabham BT46B fan car??? I'm dying to drive that thing. Even virtually.
Also, why do ZERO sims have the Brabham BT46B fan car??? I'm dying to drive that thing. Even virtually.
- 9
- United States
It's been raceroom's premium pack in a nutshell, I own it and I didn't even know I had it.
TonyJZX
(Banned)
- 3,945
- Australia
I think its come out in the GT Sport Spa debacle that many licensing fees arent flat rate.
If you're Spa and a game like Automobiista comes and it expects to sell 500k copies then your fee might be only $5,000.
If a game like Gran Turismo comes up under Sony's banner and you expect to sell 10 mil. copies then your fee is NOT going to be $5,000 as well.
They will scale up their fee given how big your company is and how much your reach is going to be.
- 1,545
- Singapore
- XSquareStickIt
SCG is absolutely within their rights to ask for what they think is fair royalties for having their cars appear in GT7. For all we know, PD could be offering pennies for each car that appears, and it wouldn't surprise me given that DLC cars are all entirely free in Sport (thank you Kaminori Samauchi! 
).
However, just because they have the rights to refuse, doesn't mean I think it's smart to. If we're talking about heavily requested cars like the 918 or LFA, or even entire brands brands like Lotus or Koenigsegg, I think PD would do well to pay a little more than what they usually do, if they have a "usual price". GT NEEDS names like that to sell more game copies, and they and generate hype. I think SCG is not only in the other boat; it's not even in the same freaking ocean as the aforementioned names. In my view, SCG NEEDS GT, not the other way around. Prior to the article, I've never even seen their cars or heard of them. I don't know what it costs a manufacturer to have their cars represented in the game, but I can't imagine it'd cost more than loaning a car to PD for a few weeks. It's just about free advertising.
SCG seem to be doing fine for themselves, even if they aren't even showing up on the automotive radar for me. I won't miss it not being in 7, and I trust that the time and resources will be put to getting another car of equal or more significance into the game.
(Unless of course they scan in another GT86......)
).However, just because they have the rights to refuse, doesn't mean I think it's smart to. If we're talking about heavily requested cars like the 918 or LFA, or even entire brands brands like Lotus or Koenigsegg, I think PD would do well to pay a little more than what they usually do, if they have a "usual price". GT NEEDS names like that to sell more game copies, and they and generate hype. I think SCG is not only in the other boat; it's not even in the same freaking ocean as the aforementioned names. In my view, SCG NEEDS GT, not the other way around. Prior to the article, I've never even seen their cars or heard of them. I don't know what it costs a manufacturer to have their cars represented in the game, but I can't imagine it'd cost more than loaning a car to PD for a few weeks. It's just about free advertising.
SCG seem to be doing fine for themselves, even if they aren't even showing up on the automotive radar for me. I won't miss it not being in 7, and I trust that the time and resources will be put to getting another car of equal or more significance into the game.
(Unless of course they scan in another GT86......)
SestoScudo
(Banned)
- 3,000
- Australia
- Decepticon 47
Sony is a big company. So it make sense that Glickenhaus to squeeze as much for a better deal.
Will see if PD, Sony and Glickenhaus will come to the table because it seems PD and Sony will go and licence other brands that are much more important.
I think glickenhaus needs Pd more than PD needs them.
PD is more than content to have most Japanese brands along with Ferrari, Lamborghini and Porsche. Lots of racing fans always believe they need to have Ferrari, Lamborghini and Porsche in a racing game its a must for many remember when Ea had the exclusive licence for Porsche which lasted for a decade which pissed off so many because their racing games missed out on an important brand.
Honestly I do hope a deal can be reached Gran Turismo in the past had Vector, Venturi and various other unknown brands adding SCG just shows how PD loves including unknown or rare brands.
I hope Vector and Venturi return one day to the GT Series. Gran Turismo series did a very good job in including rare gems that became loved for many like the Espace F1.
Last edited:
- 936
- Earth
- Ask me for one!
- Ask me for one!
I agree they, like other major manufacturers, are right to be entitled to royalties, licensing fees, in order to be featured in video games and/or other media. However, the way they express their opinions in social media isn't appropriately phrased for public view. They should have worded it in a professional manner, like how several users here have pointed out. Even if it's a video game, which falls in the entertainment, there's also business values and context to be observed. I'm not sure if expressing in a seemingly unprofessional context in public platform (i.e. social media) would be putting themselves at a disadvantage, but for sure it's almost equivalent to taking a step backwards on getting another level up the spotlight.
Up till when this conversation was up, I've never heard or seen such brand before on the roads or on the internet. But seeing such response for the first time would leave me with a less favorable impression on the company itself. Especially on how it deals with the public queries and mentions. Every opportunity means business, and it means being professional inside and out, not ego and poor choice of worded phrases used.
Up till when this conversation was up, I've never heard or seen such brand before on the roads or on the internet. But seeing such response for the first time would leave me with a less favorable impression on the company itself. Especially on how it deals with the public queries and mentions. Every opportunity means business, and it means being professional inside and out, not ego and poor choice of worded phrases used.
- 1,788
- Turkey
I've never heard of that manufacturer before and therefore wouldn't really mind them not being in the game. That aside I've always been wondering which way round this works. Do game publishers pay manufacturers for the license or do manufacturers pay the publishers so they can advertise their cars? The answer is probably vastly different depending on which manufacturer you're talking about. I can see a similar issue with rental car companies as well where well known brands would have a much easier time getting their cars into their fleets whereas lesser known car makers would get less lucrative deals. However, seeing how much exposure rental cars usually get this would go a long way towards advertising their cars, increasing brand awareness and creating new potential customers along the way.
- 1,296
- Australia
- TPC_Fudsy
- 16,411
- United Kingdom
To be honest I'm disappointed in many of you. Opinions on licensing aside, it's a shame more of you don't take an interest in the Nürburgring 24 hour (since it's the best race on any calendar!)
- 34,588
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
It's been so long since I played (Or even heard about) RaceRoom so no surprise I wasn't aware. Even then, that now makes it just 2 sims and 5 Mobile game titles. Interestingly, its under "P4/5 Competizione" and not "Scuderia Cameron Glickenhaus"
- 16,411
- United Kingdom
The car wasn't produced by SCG, it was produced for James Glickenhaus by Pininfarina and Ferrari.
edit: Sorry, just realised it was the racing car in RaceRoom you're talking about. Perhaps a licensing clash since Ferrari weren't too happy it at the time.
Perhaps PD are also not offering Koenigsegg sensible money.
- 1,605
- Greece
- Giorgos_Ferrari
- 230
- London
- Meggido12
IDK, the frank manner of talk used by Glickenhaus was rather insightful for me as a customer. What I got from that exchange was "we want a better offer, other titles perhaps not as popular as GT are willing to pay what we ask, so why can't Sony/PD".
Some one also posted that perhaps PD are probably hard negotiators, which is great business wise. I must admit i'ts actually allowing me to put pieces of a puzzle together.
I've always questioned why certain manufacturers were rather stingy with their products being included into GT's line up, perhaps it's as simple that, PD are often stingy with the pay.(not including exclusive contracts)
If Glickenhaus used more vague terms such us we have yet to come to an agreement or such, personally for me the actual issue would have been rather obscured.
I'm also aware of just how effective the marketing opportunities are for manufacturers who agree to license products into video games and vice versa. Like many others, if it wasn't for certain video games(especially GT) I wouldn't have known of certain brands, marques and racing dsciplines. I'd like to think both companies can benefit equally.
- 248
- Adelaide
- LilBigHulk
You know this might be more a GT problem than first thought. We all want more hyper cars in the game and maybe GT just are not willing to pay what others do. It would explain why we rarely get new cars in the game
- 3,792
Lol at bashing this guy because he thinks a big dev like PD should pay minimum the same as tiny devs like Kunos. You can argue all you like who brings the most to the table but theres nothing suggesting theres something wrong with this guys character because he believes they should meet the fee others have paid. Having said that he should be honoured PD are even interested and should beg them to include their cars. He can ask for more in the future when players have built a relationship with his cars.
. I kid, semi kid.
Nothing unprofessional whatsoever. He stated his demands. Agree or disagree with the merits of the demand but nothing unprofessional about it, just blunt.
So like all the other cars then
. I kid, semi kid.I would surely think that wouldn't stand when the game is selling itself on the contents of its game I.e those brands. If a sim had no Ferraris in it, but there was a Ferrari with branding sat in the car park as you drive by, maybe that would be covered but not assets you actually use? I haven't read up on this situation but that sounds more likely to me.
He wanted to race it as a Ferrari but Ferrari said no so they just built the shell in the same shape in carbon ( iirc ) and the platform is a Ferrari F430.
The more I see it, the more I convinced that what Glickenhaus actually doing is to gatekeep (non mobile) games that they don't use for their own team drivers simulation.
The fact that it only appears on Asseto Corsa and Raceroom and not the others, not just Gran Turismo, seems oddly specific.
The fact that it only appears on Asseto Corsa and Raceroom and not the others, not just Gran Turismo, seems oddly specific.
