Turn 10 Confirms Microtransaction Plans for Forza 7

[CSLACR]

Isn't there a legal boundary somewhere near using tokens for loot crates?
Aka gambling laws?

(Which would render most of this thread useless)

 

[FordGTGuy]

Which can't bring anything pro-consumer to the table.

Micro-transactions literally are pro-consumer, it's offering a consumer product to those that want it.

Anti-consumer depends on the value it offers in trade.

 

[Famine]

Isn't there a legal boundary somewhere near using tokens for loot crates?
Aka gambling laws?

I've checked, with several gambling bodies. Essentially gambling charities and action groups believe that the mechanism is indistinguishable from gambling, but in the UK it is not legally gambling. Laws may differ elsewhere, and there's some interesting facets to the gambling laws here in the UK that give it a pass in a legislative grey area, but for us it isn't gambling to us microtransactions for virtual, guaranteed-prize lotteries. Yet.

 

[JakeMR2]

I've checked, with several gambling bodies. Essentially gambling charities and action groups believe that the mechanism is indistinguishable from gambling, but in the UK it is not legally gambling. Laws may differ elsewhere, and there's some interesting facets to the gambling laws here in the UK that give it a pass in a legislative grey area, but for us it isn't gambling to us microtransactions for virtual, guaranteed-prize lotteries. Yet.

Maybe once it gets out of control when every publisher tries to milk said consumer it may differ and the governments may step in to limit it a lot. Since I believe in the US you can't gamble under the age of 21.

 

[Symtex]

Just to confirm to everyone that I am not lying.

 

[FordGTGuy]

I've checked, with several gambling bodies. Essentially gambling charities and action groups believe that the mechanism is indistinguishable from gambling, but in the UK it is not legally gambling. Laws may differ elsewhere, and there's some interesting facets to the gambling laws here in the UK that give it a pass in a legislative grey area, but for us it isn't gambling to us microtransactions for virtual, guaranteed-prize lotteries. Yet.

Gambling includes the chance of getting nothing in return, you always get something in Forza 7.

 

[Lain]

What's assumptive about saying some people making this into a big deal have no real experience with the series? That Jim video is just one example, and there's a few people in this very thread that have said as much.

Jim's big deal is with microtransactions as a whole, not just in Forza 7... he absolutely loathes them, and doesn't give a crap if Forza's specific implementation is "harmless" and doesn't ostensibly affect the core balance... it's still greedy moneygrabbing in an already full-priced game. And I agree with him, although he certainly exaggerates for comedic effect and entertainment purposes. But fair enough, knowing this site you're probably completely right about people blindly making a big deal over FM7.... I just haven't noticed it first-hand. Like I said, I mostly keep my nose buried in the off-topic section. 👍

Let's look at it this way. Let's say T10 implemented cheat codes for any car in the game. Any car that was grabbed via cheat code, however, would be locked away from any online features, to promote fairness. No Rivals, no Auction House, no online multiplayer. Achievements would have to be disabled, too. Does that extend to sharing tuning setups, too?

As a developer, T10 would now be stuck promoting the ultimate solo sandbox experience, but by making it completely and utterly separate to Microsoft's XBL ecosystem — a very important source of income. It'd also be effectively destroying any sense of progression in the game. Considering you can rent any of the vehicles already... what's the difference?

Whoa whoa, hold the phone... I can completely understand why you'd need to prevent the cheats from completely busting the auction house economy. But why would these vehicles need to be barred from rivals or online multiplayer?? So what, it's ok if some rich kid outright buys these vehicles for the purpose of using them for these modes, but not ok for people to obtain them immediately if it's for free? It's not really giving them an unfair advantage since it hypothetically wouldn't be too hard for somebody to earn that vehicle legitimately or another vehicle of similar performance, so what's the issue? You said it wasn't pay to win.... right?

 

[sems4arsenal]

Micro-transactions literally are pro-consumer, it's offering a consumer product to those that want it.

Anti-consumer depends on the value it offers in trade.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Do you even understand what the word consumer means?

Consumer:

a person who purchases goods and services for personal use.

Pro consumer means to openly offer the ability to purchase products and services and to also in turn offer a value worthy of the purchase to the people buying it.

Anti-consumer would be to restrict the ability to purchase products and services or offer a value that is unfair to the people buying it.

Maybe use another term that makes more sense.

People here aren't arguing about the value of the purchase, they are arguing against the idea of the purchase at all, arguing against the ability to purchase something is literally anti-consumer.

You know the literal "antithesis" of consumer?

Honestly, if people choose to buy these loot boxes(something lots of people do in many full price games out now) that is up to them.

 

[JakeMR2]

Do you even understand what the word consumer means?

Consumer:

a person who purchases goods and services for personal use.

Pro consumer means to openly offer the ability to purchase products and services.

Anti-consumer would be to restrict the ability to purchase products and services.

Maybe use another term that makes more sense.

Microtransactions has been in most new games so far. It's the over saturation of these "services" you call it. It can definitely restrict you from obtaining things normally like in Forza Motorsport 2 or 4 (however in 4 Tokens are absurdly useless item). Why do you think companies do add these microtransactions in? Why do you think that the values of some of the minor triple A games like COD, Battlefield, and other genre titles use these. Including GTA Online? They are there for the keen sense of making a profit margin bigger than the base game themselves. GTA Online, for example. Did 500,000,000 million in terms of microtransactions fees over it's 5 years of play. Even if 90% don't buy microtransactions, there are a 10% of what a company calls Whales to make up the profit margin. I would say they are anti-consumer if you ask me.

But with the lack of info about the microtransaction ordeal and the loot box things, I can assure you may have to buy tokens to buy or unlock loot boxes. Or it will be a separate thing you can earn as a bonus.

Companies like Microsoft, Take Two, Rockstar Games, EA, and Activision see the profit and they will do anything to get to that number, they don't care if you hate the practice or not. The best situation I can see this affecting everyone in each type of game is a mass boycott of the big triple A titles by judging with your wallet, or a scandal about microtransactions and the way that they are used. I would say if it let it happen the companies will get away with a lot stuff, thus hiding some functions from the consumer until those consumers realize that it was the wrong move to buy such game that had microtransactions.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Microtransactions has been in most new games so far. It's the oversaturation these "services" you call it. It can definitely restrict you from obtaining things normally like in Forza Motorsport 2 or 4 (however in 4 Tokens are absurdly useless item). Why do you think companies do add these microtransactions in? Why do you think that the values of some of the minor triple A games like COD, Battlefield, and other genre titles use these. Including GTA Online? They are there for the keen sense of making a profit margin bigger than the base game themselves. GTA Online, for example. Did 500,000,000 million in terms of microtransactions fees over it's 5 years of play. Even if 90% don't buy microtransactions, there are a 10% of what a company calls Whales to make up the profit margin. I would say they are anti-consumer if you ask me.

But with the lack of info about the microtransaction ordeal and the loot box things, I can assure you may have to buy tokens to buy or unlock loot boxes. Or it will be a separate thing you can earn as a bonus.

Companies like Microsoft, Take Two, Rockstar Games, EA, and Activision see the profit and they will do anything to get to that number, they don't care if you hate the practice or not. The best situation I can see this affecting everyone in each type of game is a mass boycott of the big triple A titles by judging with your wallet, or a scandal about microtransactions and the way that they are used. I would say if it let it happen the companies will get away with a lot stuff, thus hiding some functions from the consumer until those consumers realize that it was the wrong move to buy such game that had microtransactions.

They are a business offering a service to those willing to purchase it, those people willing to purchase it are clearly not asking for you to defend them or their wallet from Microsoft or any other company.

If people want to buy treasure maps in Assassin's Creed, let them waste their money. If people want to spend their money buying loot boxes in Forza 7 when they don't need to, let them; it's their money and they are likely adults.

 

[JakeMR2]

They are a business offering a service to those willing to purchase it, those people willing to purchase it are clearly not asking for you to defend them or their wallet from Microsoft or any other company.

If people want to buy treasure maps in Assassin's Creed, let them waste their money. If people want to spend their money buying loot boxes in Forza 7 when they don't need to, let them; it's their money and they are likely adults.

If it is up to consumer choices, then why is the system of loot boxes any better? What if you get something not so good on spending with those crates? What if you got lucky and you want to try again? It creates a addiction to your brain functions to keep on doing this over and over to get that prize. If you've played Test Drive: Unlimited 2's casino or any true casino out there your chances of getting a super rare item or special item is pretty damn low because of what the system does. Thus, it encourages players to spend even more money than they have to. Let's just say it creates a false progression cycle to actually see if they can bait you to buy microtransactions, just like a mobile game. The economy is good now in Forza Motorsport 7, but how long will that last, and what if a new player sees such a thing and they can't progress they'll just trade it in.

http://www.pcgamer.com/wwe-2k18-wont-have-paid-microtransactions-says-2k/

That's an example of a microtransaction ordeal with the loot box thing that companies love because they know the consumer will spend more of their hard earned cash just to progress. And, it also depends on the system they have for earning XP and Credits. They can easily make it bad grind compared to the previous Forza entries. A developer would not put microtransactions in just because it's optional. They put that there so people can buy the best loot boxes as a trial and nothing else.

I partially don't agree with you on this issue, personally I hate this type of economy. I rather have a FM2 type of economy where you can properly progress through every series to get to the best championships and best cars.

 

[FordGTGuy]

If it is up to consumer choices, then why is the system of loot boxes any better? What if you get something not so good on spending with those crates? What if you got lucky and you want to try again? It creates a addiction to your brain functions to keep on doing this over and over to get that prize. If you've played Test Drive: Unlimited 2's casino or any true casino out there your chances of getting a super rare item or special item is pretty damn low because of what the system does. Thus, it encourages players to spend even more money than they have to. Let's just say it creates a false progression cycle to actually see if they can bait you to buy microtransactions, just like a mobile game. The economy is good now in Forza Motorsport 7, but how long will that last, and what if a new player sees such a thing and they can't progress they'll just trade it in.

http://www.pcgamer.com/wwe-2k18-wont-have-paid-microtransactions-says-2k/

That's an example of a microtransaction ordeal with the loot box thing that companies love because they know the consumer will spend more of their hard earned cash just to progress. And, it also depends on the system they have for earning XP and Credits. They can easily make it bad grind compared to the previous Forza entries. A developer would not put microtransactions in just because it's optional. They put that there so people can buy the best loot boxes as a trial and nothing else.

I partially don't agree with you on this issue, personally I hate this type of economy. I rather have a FM2 type of economy where you can properly progress through every series to get to the best championships and best cars.

What happened to being an adult and accepting the responsibilities of your own decisions?

If you bought a loot box, know that the outcome could be good or bad, and ended up not getting what you wanted.... well you made the choice to do it.

Apparently personal accountability is dead.

Also, I'll say it again; those adults that are choosing to purchase these loot boxes are not asking for you to defend them by demanding them no longer be an option for them to even use.(which is anti-consumer btw).

MT will go away if people decide to stop buying them but the reality is that there are lots of adults out there willing to buy them.

 

[Lain]

People here aren't arguing about the value of the purchase, they are arguing against the idea of the purchase at all, arguing against the ability to purchase something is literally anti-consumer.

No, I've been arguing the value of the purchase. The people buying it might feel like it's "worth it", but they're still being ripped off... what they're buying is valueless and could easily be made available for free. It wouldn't cost the developers a damn thing, except for potential free profit from suckers.

They are a business offering a service to those willing to purchase it, those people willing to purchase it are clearly not asking for you to defend them or their wallet from Microsoft or any other company.

If people want to buy treasure maps in Assassin's Creed, let them waste their money. If people want to spend their money buying loot boxes in Forza 7 when they don't need to, let them; it's their money and they are likely adults.

So... let suckers be suckers? Ok sure, I might... if it weren't for the fact that microtransactions in games are continually getting worse and worse to the point where it's affecting everybody. Things in Forza 7 might be hunky dory, and nevermind cheat codes being practically extinct thanks to them (even in single-player portions of games)... crap like Shadow of War and NBA2K18 wouldn't be happening if devs didn't think they could get away with it.

 

[FordGTGuy]

No, I've been arguing the value of the purchase. The people buying it might feel like it's "worth it", but they're still being ripped off... what they're buying is valueless and could easily be made available for free. It wouldn't cost the developers a damn thing, except for potential free profit from suckers..

You think they are being ripped off, it's up to them if they think they are being ripped off(btw this is currently a hypothetical as MT aren't even in the game yet).

What they are buying is valueless?(Value is subjective btw.)

Lol ok bro.

You know what people do when they feel ripped off? They stop buying it.

You know what people are continuing to do in games? Buy loot boxes.

Are there people with gambling problems? Sure, but they shouldn't ruin the ability of adults with self control to have the availability to purchase what they want.

We aren't going to shut down the lottery because some people can't control themselves.

So... let suckers be suckers? Ok sure, I might... if it weren't for the fact that microtransactions in games are continually getting worse and worse to the point where it's affecting everybody. Things in Forza 7 might be hunky dory, and nevermind cheat codes being practically extinct thanks to them (even in single-player portions of games)... crap like Shadow of War and NBA2K18 wouldn't be happening if devs didn't think they could get away with it.

Who said they're suckers?

They are adults, stop trying to defend people who aren't asking to be defended.

 

[Lain]

I'm not defending them, I'm calling them suckers. Because they are. Because they're paying something that has no intrinsic value, and any perceived value from the benefits they provide is meaningless because those same benefits could just as easily be given to them for free but is only being withheld thanks to greed.

And no, it's not up to them to decide if they're being ripped off... they can be oblivious to the fact they're being ripped off, they can be in denial, but they are most definitely being ripped off.

And like I said, my concern isn't necessarily these people's wallets. My concern is with how the acceptance of these practices affect the game industry as a whole.

 

[FordGTGuy]

I'm not defending them, I'm calling them suckers. Because they are. Because they're paying something that has no intrinsic value, and any perceived value from the benefits they provide is meaningless because those same benefits could just as easily be given to them for free but is only being withheld thanks to greed.

Except the benefit of saving them time.

And no, it's not up to them to decide if they're being ripped off... they can be oblivious to the fact they're being ripped off, they can be in denial, but they are most definitely being ripped off.

Actually it is completely up to them if they are being ripped off.

If they feel that buying the MT is enough of a value from a time saving stand point... they aren't being ripped off.

And like I said, my concern isn't necessarily these people's wallets. My concern is with how the acceptance of these practices affect the game industry as a whole.

Forza is an odd game to use as a beach head for such an effort.

Forza has allowed people to hide MT and their game offers so much that they aren't even needed.

Overwatch or GTA V would be a better place to put your effort.

 

[Lain]

Except the benefit of saving them time.

No, that could be given to them for free. But they are being charged for the privilege instead, aka being taken advantage of like the suckers they are.

 

[Northstar]

No, that could be given to them for free. But they are being charged for the privilege instead, aka being taken advantage of like the suckers they are.

Just wondering, did you buy you premium or did someone else gift it to you?

 

[FordGTGuy]

No, that could be given to them for free. But they are being charged for the privilege instead, aka being taken advantage of like the suckers they are.

I didn't know I could go down to the time shop and get time for free that would let me put 10 hours a day into Forza.... thanks bro.

I'm going to openly admit that I'm pretty pro-capitalist and free market so I'm never going to argue against the availability of goods, products and services... no matter how crappy they might seem.

If the market isn't willing to spend money on them... they'll go away but people are willing to spend money on them.

Why do you think GTA still makes so much money?

 

[Lain]

Just wondering, did you buy you premium or did someone else gift it to you?

I bought Premium myself, but I can see where you're going with this.

Yes Premium doesn't have any "real" value either. But I viewed my Premium purchase with the understanding that it was more of a donation than anything else, because I wanted to support the site.

So fair enough, if people want to justify their microtransaction purchases as "donations" to the developer... be my guest. But when they're already charging you full price for the game, it's still greedy for the devs to demand more money for the privilege of cheats. And I certainly wouldn't feel like making a "donation" under those circumstances.

I didn't know I could go down to the time shop and get time for free that would let me put 10 hours a day into Forza.... thanks bro.

Wow! I didn't know buying microtransactions gave me literal time, and not just artificial time save that could just as easily be given for free! Shoot, I'm gonna buy up all the microtransactions I can afford... I'll have all the time in the world!

 

[FordGTGuy]

Wow! I didn't know buying microtransactions gave me literal time, and not just artificial time save that could just as easily be given for free! Shoot, I'm gonna buy up all the microtransactions I can afford... I'll have all the time in the world!

If they can save you the time of grinding, they essentially do give you time and that is the value for most MTs.

 

[Lain]

If they can save you the time of grinding, they essentially do give you time and that is the value for most MTs.

So if they can save you time of grinding for free, they essentially do give you time and your whole snarky "time shop" bit was meaningless.

 

[FordGTGuy]

So if they can save you time of grinding for free, they essentially do give you time and your whole snarky "time shop" bit was meaningless.

Apparently it was meaningful as it took you multiple posts to understand what I meant, it was also fun.

 

[Lain]

Apparently it was meaningful as it took you multiple posts to understand what I meant, it was also fun.

No, I understood what you meant from the beginning. I've been trying to make you realize why it's flawed, but clearly it's hopeless so I'm out. See you guys in The Rumble Strip.

 

[Northstar]

But when they're already charging you full price for the game, it's still greedy for the devs to demand more money for the privilege of cheats.

I don't know that I would call the practice in itself greedy though. Games have been the same price since 2005 in the US at least. Since that last increase games have become considerably more complicated with online play and HD graphics in ever increasing resolution.

Now developers are faced with a very tough conundrum. They need to make a good profit as simply breaking even or making a small profit won't cover the next game or get more investors on board.

So what are they supposed to do? Consumers already complain about spending $60 on a game even if it is complete, so raising the base price would likely be a disaster. DLC is obviously widely used as it's a good way to get some income post launch, but only a small percentage of players buy it and it takes money to create it. Micro transactions are the third option and while being the least favorable value wise, from a business stand point they are good for reasons you've stated.

That doesn't mean some developers don't go too far, 2K seems to be proof of that. But I don't think that makes the practice itself terrible.

 

[CSLACR]

I've checked, with several gambling bodies. Essentially gambling charities and action groups believe that the mechanism is indistinguishable from gambling, but in the UK it is not legally gambling. Laws may differ elsewhere, and there's some interesting facets to the gambling laws here in the UK that give it a pass in a legislative grey area, but for us it isn't gambling to us microtransactions for virtual, guaranteed-prize lotteries. Yet.

I believe that's how it has gone is the U.S. so far as well.

I know there was a big ruckus about this with phone apps a few years ago, and I believe they eventually refunded some money to underage "consumers". (More likely their parents)

 

[sems4arsenal]

I don't know that I would call the practice in itself greedy though. Games have been the same price since 2005 in the US at least. Since that last increase games have become considerably more complicated with online play and HD graphics in ever increasing resolution.

Now developers are faced with a very tough conundrum. They need to make a good profit as simply breaking even or making a small profit won't cover the next game or get more investors on board.

So what are they supposed to do? Consumers already complain about spending $60 on a game even if it is complete, so raising the base price would likely be a disaster. DLC is obviously widely used as it's a good way to get some income post launch, but only a small percentage of players buy it and it takes money to create it. Micro transactions are the third option and while being the least favorable value wise, from a business stand point they are good for reasons you've stated.

That doesn't mean some developers don't go too far, 2K seems to be proof of that. But I don't think that makes the practice itself terrible.

Now THIS is the only proper pro-argument. The fact that with the price increase of game development, should the $60 dollar model be scrapped? It's an interesting question but I feel that publishers and devs now don't release games as frequently. The rise of season pass and DLC is also a much better way to ask consumers for more money, because in return they actually get something worth it. I don't think MTs are the answer. MTs fit the F2P system because in the mobile space -- there are a million apps. The only way to grab the attention is release the game for free and monetize later on (most people still don't pay even then). MTs in a product that the consumer has already paid for is straight up greed.

I would also love to see reviewers dock scores for it. I love Naughty Dog but I didn't like how reviewers swept the MTs under the radar (much like with FM7). The reason loot crates are becoming the more popular form is because we let MTs slide. Who knows what other forms of 🤬 AAA companies will come up with next.

 

[McLaren]

No, I've been arguing the value of the purchase. The people buying it might feel like it's "worth it", but they're still being ripped off... what they're buying is valueless and could easily be made available for free. It wouldn't cost the developers a damn thing, except for potential free profit from suckers.

What in this game isn't available for free? I keep seeing you anti-MT guys throw this line out there as if at some point, the game asks for money. Where? The loot boxes that give you mod cards to help make a significant amount of money back? Or free cars & driver gear?

The deeper I get into this game, the more it feels like the initial response to the loot boxes was sudden reaction to change. The game hasn't pushed them on me at all, they're just an optional tab like anything else. I've only purchases 1 of the 300,000CR ones so far just because I had the money to do so & wanted to see what I got. Mostly mod cards I used in return to boost my CR wins; I'd wager with right variables such as AI difficulty turned way up, Long distance races, & 3 mod cards from a loot crate (that typically have 3 uses each before they expire), you can make the most of that 300,000CR back fairly quickly.