I never said 'exactly', but I do think it's probably an underlying strategy for many developers. Anyway, how do you know it 'is just completely untrue'..?
It's untrue because you can never guarantee what cars you can get licensing for and even if you do decide on a car you cannot guarantee you will be able to gain access to the car to collect reference material.
It's strange to suggest that charging more for something because you don't think it will sell very well makes that item represent good value for money by default. Why should any consumer supplement poor sales by paying an over-inflated price? Sorry, that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.
That's because it isn't about representing a good-value, it is about justifying the cost of creating the content.
This is a digital product, that means it has a static cost for creation and marketing. The more you sell of this product the more the cost of the creation of the product can be spread out.
Ultimately the price of these kinds of products is based on the estimate total they will sell.
Have you any proof for this statement of fact? I'd be very interested to see it.
Do you have any proof that they do?
Fine. Don't charge for it then. You really can't understand how day-one DLC pisses so many people off?
Do I understand why people get pissed off because of day one DLC? Yep.
I also understand that day one DLC is created after the game goes gold which means that the revenue of the game does not go towards the cost of its creation.
However, Forza 5 is the only title in the series to charge for the day one DLC pack; Forza Horizon 2 returned to the free day one DLC that they always had before.
Purely out of the goodness of their hearts..? No business considerations at all?
Everything is done for a reason and they've mentioned before that track dlc only fragmented their community and hurt the online community in the long-run.
Free track DLC -> Stops fragmentation -> Increases longevity of the games community -> Increases the sales of car packs.
I'd argue that charging for the tracks would actually have hurt Turn 10 financially in the long run through bad consumer relations and ill-will.
Of course, but no matter what it still was a financial hit that they could've charged for.
It's often a difficult choice for big fans of the relevant game, despite a feeling of being taken advantage of.
I've never felt like I've been taken advantage of, maybe because I have the basic understanding that I chose to spend that money and was not forced to do so.
I hate it when people make it sound like you were forced to purchase the content; if you don't support the price of a product... don't buy it.
How about release it such a low price that almost everybody buys it and recover your costs that way? There's no packaging or shipping considerations. Every sale is pure profit.
They can't guarantee that it will sell a much larger amount at a lower price, even if they were half the cost some people are only interested in purchasing cars they want and nothing else.
Turn 10 has the numbers for their sales and they've determined that the price they are setting is what is needed to justify the content that is created.
Although this is a Forza thread, my original comments weren't a snipe specifically at Forza (as you seem to think). Your unwavering loyalty to the brand is cute FGTG. It's been fun but your blinkered view makes reasoned debate very difficult sometimes.
Anyway - I thought I was on your 'ignore' list?
Let's see a recap on the comment that started this.
All talk about 'best value' car DLC needs to cease. There is no 'best value' car DLC in ANY racing game. Do the maths. Cars would need to be priced at a few pence each to represent good value compared to the original price of the game as sold.
How can anyone consider it 'good value' to pay half as much as the retail price of any game to get an additional tiny percentage of content? It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
And let's conveniently ignore the suspicions about content being removed from the retail game to feed DLC packs.
This isn't a pop just at the Forza franchise. It's seems to be endemic in almost all racers.
Yep, I'm the one not capable of reasonable discussion on the matter.
How about some proper criticism against the series instead of just the tired "they save already created content during the development of the game to purposely resell as DLC later" argument?
Here is a list to get you started:
- All the car model discrepancies that persist through the titles.
- The upgrade system that hasn't changed for the past 3-4 forza titles.
- Proper drag racing that isn't just a stupid straight line race track with stickier tires.
- Lack of proper engine tuning and the lack of detailed information in a convenient place for tuners.
- Lack of the ability to search for private lobbies.
- Lack of proper tire wear and fuel consumption.
- Lack of options when using pitstops.
- Insanely short career races that always start you third from the back.
- Hoppers that don't cater towards people that use no assists.
- Paint liveries that look awful in race and in photomode due to quality loss.
- 30 fps replays that makes the game look unrealistic on playback.
- Poor and unrealistic replay camera placement.
- A photomode feature that hasn't really improved across a few titles that isn't even capable of saving custom settings.
- A completely awful garage list that forces you to scroll horizontally through hundreds of cars.
- Lack of track layout pictures when choosing tracks in private lobbies.
- Inability to choose the exact cars that AI drivers drive in private lobbies.
If you think I'm incapable of finding fault in Forza, you're wrong
