Slashdot Mirror
Gran Tourismo HD Cars Sold Seperately?
KDR_11k writes "1up reports on a Famitsu article discussing the future of microtransactions for PS3. According to the article, Gran Tourismo HD will require all cars to be bought via microtransactions. More specifically, the 'classic' package will come with no cars or tracks and the 'premium' package will include 30 cars and a measly 2 tracks to race on. Additional cars cost between 50 and 100 yen ($0.43-$0.85) and tracks go for 200-500 yen ($1.71-$4.26) a piece. No pricing was given for the game itself." From the article: "Now, is it possible that the game will be a full-priced title with a built-in download system that allows users to download cars and tracks equal to the number of the game's retail price? We hope the model ends up similar to this. However, right now, details are extremely sparse, and Sony has to have an answer to these questions -- most of the people who can answer are over in Tokyo, we'll update if we hear back. Welcome to next-gen."
Everyone blames Sony, but this ideia has probably originated from publishers or developers. Used games sales bring no profit whatsoever to hardware manufacturers, game publishers or developers. This way they could still allow a used game market, yet, cashing in on it. I don't like this one bit, if they don't release a full version of the game I simply won't buy it, but I can see their point of view. As I see they could go even go the extra mile and provide console-locking ability, publishers would just climax and consumers would swallow or shun it. It's the same with DRM in music and movies, most consumers don't notice or don't care(well that might be changing, since only 5% of ipoders buy from ITMS), and the few people who now that DRM is devil, aren't express enough to fight the wishes of MPAA and RIAA. We should come up with an acronym for money-sucking-DRM-lovers-Game-developers.
The difference here just might be that Sony is selling a product WITHOUT ANY cars or courses to run them on. So you could basically buy the product and be able to sit there and look at how pretty the GUI is.
So I think that your analogy to MS about expansions, consumeable, etc misses the point. Because when those games shipped, the reality of the situation is that you could at least use them.
Now, if Sony was going ot ship their product for $10 and charge that for the cars, then by all means. However, if they plan on charging the full price of game for a version that doesn't include cars or courses then that is rediculous.
Justin - Don't be afraid of my blog, it won't bite.
na spent it all on the console
I realise I'm chiming in far too late here, but the summary is wrong. According to this Gamespot article (scroll halfway down to the "update"), Gran Turismo HD Classic will feature all 750 cars and 51 tracks from previous Gran Turismo games, updated to look better in HD. The Premium version only contains 30 cars and 2 tracks, but it's content that's been designed from scratch for HD (far more polygons per model). The idea is that the Premium version focuses on online racing and downloadable content, while the Classic version is for people who just want to play Gran Turismo in HD.
Still pretty unexciting IMHO, and I have pretty strong reservations about it working. Time will tell I guess.
Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
What the fuck? PS games are the cheapest games have been since the NES. I sure as hell remember paying $70 in the early 1990s for my copy of FF3, nearly $80 in the mid 1990s for my copy of Chrono Trigger, $80 for a used copy of Wave Race 64 right after launch, etc. It was the PS1 that brought games down to $40-$50, and in a decade since then, the price hasn't even kept up with the rate of inflation. Your average PS2 game probably costs 2/3s as much as your average game in the heyday of the SNES. SNES games ranged from $60-$80 new ($78-$105 adjusted for inflation). A $50 price ceiling for games is a substantial price cut from that.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Note that, at least for Halo 2, if you just waited a few months, the premium maps were released for free.
I read a thread that said "not ALL next gen games charge money after purchase". RIIIIGGGHHHHT. If one company makes money from this tactic, many other companies will quickly follow suit.
By the time my 2 year old starts playing games, they will have an initial purchase price of $200.00, require 27 hours per day to play, and the entertainment industry will be watching you through a built-in camera to make sure you're not using "their" product wrongly.
I'll stick to Ur-Quan Masters on my hand-me-down Ubuntu laptop. Fantastic game that has yet to cost me a penny.
Well, the solution to this issue seems pretty simple. If you don't want to deal with the nickel-and-dime fees (or rather, "microtransactions"), then don't buy the software. It's that simple - if you, as a customer, are offered something that you don't want, you don't A. Gripe about it, or B. Buy it anyway and then gripe about it. You just don't buy it. That way, companies get the message that they need to change their products to appeal to consumers and make money. If you want to be active about it, then organize a boycott or whatever. That's how capitalism is supposed to work, anyway.
As a side note, if the only products available are objectionable in this regard, then a host of new problems are raised. But inter-corporational cooperation to limit consumer choice is something that seems, for the moment, to be limited mostly to the music industry and DRM.
quia potentia mens mentis