We kind of have to.
We kind of have to speak with our wallets moving forward. Myself included.
We kind of have to.
I think it's too late.
Remember when we all melted down over horse armor DLC? Those seem like the good old days now. It's amazing how much we've mentally adapted to being ripped off.
OK but weren't the previous entries just as good MINUS the inclusion of immersion breaking real money options?
What about the future? You think they will continue to tread carefully while moderately milking the whales?
I sure don't. They will follow the path of least resistance towards the options with the highest possible revenue.
The old games didn't give you an option to accelerate towards the end of the game and own the best cars without effort. So you had to do the ugly business of actual playing the game to achieve the best and most sought after cars.
So to answer the above poster who has a family, children, and a job just as I do you now have a choice: Play the game through as you would have in the past or buy your way to the end.
I don't know what the future holds with this level of monetization. From the outside looking in I see Forza as a game series that has gotten better and better, prettier and prettier over the years at a higher expense to the developer and game players have paid the same amount of money with every iteration to enjoy it. All the while the sales for the series seem to have remained relatively flat.
This version is also unlikely to sell as much as quickly as other versions due to it being sold into a smaller install base. But it might have legs as a launch title. Who knows.
I DO think that Turn 10 wants to apply a second revenue model to help cover the costs of development but this cost is shifted to people who just want to blitz through the game without the effort of playing it.
Maybe I lack cynicism but I always look at the game I buy as being the complete game. DLC, microtransactions, consumables and all are bolt ons or accelerators to the core experience.
I can fully see a FPS having a paywall to allow a player to simply buy the best guns and all the perks. Especially CoD style games with huge player bases where the leveling up is a time based hassle for the 8th time over. I think that is where this is headed.
Except that's not what he said, at all."I'm sad that people didn't get our intentions. So this is really your fault!"
So much manufactured rage when it comes to this.
If I'm going to spend my time playing (not grinding) through career mode, like I would in every other driving game over the last decade so I can achieve the best cars at the back end as a reward then I should feel good about that as I'm enjoying the journey.
If there is someone out there who says fuck the journey put me at the end then I have no problem with MS or any developer putting up a cash wall that gets them there. To give it away for nothing in terms of either time or money is a like Skyrim coming with a "See Ending" option in the main menu or "Start with fully leveled up Character" option to skip the annoying playing the game part of playing the game.
If there are people out there who can't be bothered to go through the actual game but want all of the rewards that come with doing that they by all means let them buy their way though. I'm going to play it the way I feel it is meant to be played.
I hope no one's using the accelerator and their data shows how useless it really is. From a design standpoint, that prompt is one of the most blatant eyesores, and there's no benefit to leveling aside from getting the credit payouts at every level.The fact that you even require an accellerator seems like an inherent design flaw to me. If progression was compelling enough why would you even care if you were having fun doing it?
As a parent myself I don't even feel the least compelled to 100% games to get enjoyment. Heck if I am not having fun playing within the first 30minutes I typically move on. I seriously don't understand how this continues to be leveraged as a positive selling point of a game.
"Don't have time to play our game? Even though we are trying to make our game MORE ACCESSIBLE to wider demogpraphics we still design our game in a way that puts us in a position where selling a shortcut makes sense"
I hope no one's using the accelerator and their data shows how useless it really is. From a design standpoint, that prompt is one of the most blatant eyesores, and there's no benefit to leveling aside from getting the credit payouts at every level.
I don't really get this kind of response. Clearly negative fan commentary is having an impact on the corporate decision making, but constantly there's this "Nothing we can do except do nothing but not pay them."We kind of have to speak with our wallets moving forward. Myself included.
I don't really get this kind of response. Clearly negative fan commentary is having an impact on the corporate decision making, but constantly there's this "Nothing we can do except do nothing but not pay them."
Huh? Are you guys paying attention to what the responses have been so far?
Because they are different types of games. There is no cheat to simply win GTAV or skip entire story sections. Even if you put on invincibility it last for only 5 minutes iirc and yous till have to play through the storyline to beat the game.
Getting certain cars would be permanent and damage progression in a racing game because the only point in those games is to win races and acquire cars.
Dan,
You can win me back for 1 week for $3.99. Or you can win me back at 2X as fast for $8.99. Or a season pass to win me back is $49.99.
The fact that you even require an accellerator seems like an inherent design flaw to me. If progression was compelling enough why would you even care if you were having fun doing it?
As a parent myself I don't even feel the least compelled to 100% games to get enjoyment. Heck if I am not having fun playing within the first 30minutes I typically move on. I seriously don't understand how this continues to be leveraged as a positive selling point of a game.
"Don't have time to play our game? Even though we are trying to make our game MORE ACCESSIBLE to wider demogpraphics we still design our game in a way that puts us in a position where selling a shortcut makes sense"
THEN WHY DOES IT COST MONEY?
Well it took a long time to get cars in FM4 and FM3, and FM2, and FM1. The game design progression was very similar. Win races, get points, buy cars. It has been similar in pretty well every racing game since the release of Gran Tourismo on PS1.
It is also a fallacy to believe that most players typically end their play session with any of these sim games with 100% of all the cars available. I would guess many players end up with maybe 50 or so cars out of the hundreds available. It seems people are putting Forza 5 up to a standard where attaining 100% of all cars is the basic end goal when the end goal is more like having won all of the races in the game.
I'm not saying it is a positive selling point, I'm saying it exists for a reason. Having to play through a game shows that the player is engaged in the experience. There is no fair way to do this.
The options I see in the Forza scenario are:
1. Have the player play through career mode to earn their cars via credits. Have no accelerators or money gated vehicles.
2. Have the player real money to buy the cars that they want immediately and still make career mode somewhat relevant.
3. Give away all the cars at the start, killing the benefit of the career mode.
4. Enable options 1. and 2. and give a variety of rewards for playing the game as normal.
Does 4 not make the most sense? I see someone with the Lotus and I know they either bought it, or they earned it through gameplay. Either way they invested something into attaining it. Just like seeing a character in an RPG with a epic mount or some incredible weapon.
That's simply untrue of the early GT games. I won credits and won a ton of cars from simply winning events. I earned all the good cars through events. It didn't take long at all.Well it took a long time to get cars in FM4 and FM3, and FM2, and FM1. The game design progression was very similar. Win races, get points, buy cars. It has been similar in pretty well every racing game since the release of Gran Tourismo on PS1.
Maybe its time for a shake up. Maybe make desired cars targetable from the beginning with specific challenges attached to each one.
Who knows but figuring out how to tackles these challenges is what games designers do for a living. IN this particular case they chose to maintain an iterative experience and throw in a shortcut to compel this particular demographic instead of designing a more robust game.
And they did this to take any easy route towards a second revenue stream which apparently they desperately needed.
I personally think game development could stand to look outside the box more and figure out how to deliver compelling COMPLETE products that dont act as gateway drugs and annoying salesmen.
I can't believe people get this bent out of shape over a fake car. It's absurd. So what if I have the same car. If you can finish ahead of me, isn't that what matters? What if 2 million people grind to get your car, then what? You're in the same position. I seriously doubt that you'd feel better if you knew people earned that car, you simply want to feel special.
Sure, I agree. Define a COMPLETE game though. It is essentially an impossible thing to do.
there's a small group of players that can't be bothered to do things and they have disposable income
So ruin the game for the majority to please a "small group of players"? Seems illogical.
No its not
You are thinking of a perfect game
I for one do enjoy that devs patch and update their games in this modern space but its not like its always necessary.
Complete games are exactly as they sound. You pay for it and its what you get. Most indies fall into this category that was once occupied by normal game development.
So ruin the game for the majority to please a "small group of players"? Seems illogical.
the most expensive car was ten million credits in game, and it only cost three car tokens which would have been three dollars. That felt like it was not making the car exclusive enough for those who are willing to pay. So we made car tokens equal to credits - it's not about making more money,
They're working on monetizing the particle systems. Will be a premium DLC.Still no weather system. Can't understand why.
I'm honestly a bit more appalled by your comments than Dan's.look what this motherfucker has to say about this shit.
fucking guy thinks his fanbase is retarded.
can you believe he actually said the above? this guy needs his head caved in.
Is FM5 less of a complete game than FM4 because it has less cars? But is it more of a game because it runs in 4x the resolution and many of the game assets were redone? Also, is the 200 cars not enough for a complete game when Need For Speed has 50?
Where is this line drawn?
I'm honestly a bit more appalled by your comments than Dan's.
look what this motherfucker has to say about this shit.
fucking guy thinks his fanbase is retarded.
can you believe he actually said the above? this guy needs his head caved in.
All they need to do is make it so it doesn't take hundreds of hours to own 100% of everything. If someone doesn't want to play the game for 40-50 hours like a normal person, or they're simply so experienced they don't need to have content drip-fed, then I don't mind microtransactions.
When it takes as long as it does to unlock everything as it does, even with cheap paywalls its easy to see what's going on.
Oh god. I can't wait to get an XB1 and Forza 5 will be the first game I buy! I'm going to do it just to spite preachy rabble-rousers. BTW, I will enjoy the game greatly and feel no shame.
Amount of content doesn't determine complete
Its quality, intended design, completed vision for the product. A quality that is reflected by player perception.
One that doesn't ask more of a player that purchased it other than to play it. To have a real money store built in always psychologically implies that you "dont have it all"
Other wise why ask for more money without quantifying why its necessary. You think the average consumer understands the plight of modern game development?
Bottom line is that its not the consumers responsibilty or problem and using MT to offset the costs is considered sleazy since we are bearing the burden of their inability to adjust, budget, or whatever the real core problem is.
The old games didn't give you an option to accelerate towards the end of the game and own the best cars without effort. So you had to do the ugly business of actual playing the game to achieve the best and most sought after cars.
So to answer the above poster who has a family, children, and a job just as I do you now have a choice: Play the game through as you would have in the past or buy your way to the end.
I don't know what the future holds with this level of monetization. From the outside looking in I see Forza as a game series that has gotten better and better, prettier and prettier over the years at a higher expense to the developer and game players have paid the same amount of money with every iteration to enjoy it. All the while the sales for the series seem to have remained relatively flat.
This version is also unlikely to sell as much as quickly as other versions due to it being sold into a smaller install base. But it might have legs as a launch title. Who knows.
I DO think that Turn 10 wants to apply a second revenue model to help cover the costs of development but this cost is shifted to people who just want to blitz through the game without the effort of playing it.
Maybe I lack cynicism but I always look at the game I buy as being the complete game. DLC, microtransactions, consumables and all are bolt ons or accelerators to the core experience.
I can fully see a FPS having a paywall to allow a player to simply buy the best guns and all the perks. Especially CoD style games with huge player bases where the leveling up is a time based hassle for the 8th time over. I think that is where this is headed.
You read it was:
Dude: I'm sorry I got caught
I read it as:
Dude: I'm sorry.
Response: Then why'd you do it?
Dude: Because we thought it was going to turn out another way, and our thought process was XYZ
Response: Well you were wrong!
I agree that the apology is not as full as it can be in the sense that it doesn't repudiate the idea of having cash unlocks, but rather just focuses on apologizing that the way they were implemented obviously hurt the enjoyment fans were able to get out of the game. But I think within the latter parameters, it seems to me to be a pretty reasonable apology.
Not to defend every game doing this, but I think there have been plenty of games (free and pay-to-play) that have allowed players to accelerate progress without alienating players as much as Forza 5 has. That's not to say that players don't have conceptual objections, or that those objections aren't valid, but rather to say that if such systems are going to be built in, there are better and worse implementations and obviously this one, based on player reports, is one of the worse ones.
There is more than enough information available about the content of a game prior to purchase that you can base your decision on.
Dude: I'm sorry.
Response: Then why'd you do it?
Dude: Because we didn't want to annoy the regulars while trying to extract hundreds or thousands of dollars from a particular type of vulnerable player. The regulars weren't suppose to care.
Response: Ok.
There was so much wrong with your post that I'd be sitting here writing a reply for the next hour, but this statement in particular is wholly incorrect. 99% of the reviews for Forza failed to mention that it's economy was crippled in order to encourage gross microtransactions.