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."

Comments

Welcome to SONY next-gen

[mr_zorg]

Welcome to next-gen.

Next-gen gaming is already here in the form on the XBOX360, and I have yet to see any such approach there. Don't go trying to make people think ALL next-gen games will be like that. Add up all of Sony's mis-steps lately and you can't help but come to the conclusion that they've lost their minds.

Re:Welcome to SONY next-gen

[Fruny]

Actually, I'm thinking "used games". This is a nice way for tham to make used games less attractive, since the original purchaser will already have consumed any "credit" that came bundled with the game (and we're not talking about a MMO subscription here). Instead you'll have to go back to Sony and pay them before the game becomes usable. Pure genius.

1) Make money off the initial sale.
2) Make money off the used game market.
3) Profit!

Re:Welcome to SONY next-gen

[Loadmaster]

Good point, but the horse armor add on isn't nearly as necessary as cars or tracks in a racing game.

Swi

Re:Welcome to SONY next-gen

[voice_of_all_reason]

Used game sales bring no profit to the hardware manufacturers, game publishers, and developers for a reason. They've already sold the product.

Your other point about them "allowing" a used game market is quite apropos to how they feel..

Re:Welcome to SONY next-gen

[gutnor]

"Used games sales bring no profit whatsoever to hardware manufacturers, game publishers or developers."

Off course they do. Saying that it brings nothing to the developer is the same fallacy than saying that one pirate copy of Windows is one net sale less for Microsoft. There are other dynamics: for example people sell game and reinvest the money directly into new games, or people that get access to more title in the second hand market and may become buyer in the first hand market, or some people invest more because they have the feeling than they can always resell it if they don't like it, ...

That's very difficult to know the real NET effect of second hand sales. Second Hand market is legit and part of the dynamic of the market. Killing the second hand market is only telling your customer that the intrinsic value of your product is nil. That's not actually a problem, that's working for an entry to the theater for example but that doesn't mean that you will be able to continue to sell your game with the same price tag.
The new price tag may be higher if the demand is high and the offer is low but in this case I doubt it. If the second hand market is really causing them a net problem, then maybe that's because the perceived value of their product is already lower than their price tag ( no replayability, poor packaging, feeling of disposable product instead of exclusive product, ... )

same as it ever was

[mikerubin]

batteries not included

Film at 11: "Sony destroys computer entertainment"

[lonesometrainer]

Gran Toursimo HD... the only game out there that could possibly make be buy a PS/3. I would have to replace my LCD-TV (no HDMI), would spend big bucks on a PS/3 and even for the game itself.

I always liked GT... had bought a PS/1 _only_ for Gran Toursimo, same about half a year ago with a PS/2, because I was in a spending mood.

I personally haven't touched a computer game for six or seven years right now - except Gran Tourismo.

Buying each track, each car? This would be just a rip-off. So, Sony/Polyphony Digital/Whoever you're expecting me to pay hundreds of bucks to play all the nice cars and tracks that had been available in every game before? I say NEVER, NEVER.

YOu now what? Your PS/3 seems to be a blatant consumer rip-off and if the story is true the day will come that I - as a consumer - will stop buying Sony products.

Go and copy some macbooks, your big days are obviously over.

What a Winner.......Not

[segedunum]

PS games have been overpriced for years without any silly ideas like this. There is absolutely no way people are going to pay for odds and ends that should be a part of the game in the first place, and just aren't worth that kind of money.

So the games industry wants to know what fuels piracy? Well, stuff like this certainly helps quite a bit.

Re:What a Winner.......Not

[chromatic]

It flat out floors me that almost everyone I know steals software AND movies AND songs, yet they don't see this as stealing.

Perhaps your contemporaries see a difference between depriving someone of a physical item and making an exact digital duplicate of digital content.

Without making any moral or ethical judgments on the behavior, it's difficult for me to use the same word for both actions when the outcomes are so different.

This will work excellent

[CrazyJim1]

If someone is stupid enough to buy a ps3 for $599, and a game at 80$, they have more money than brains, and will probably buy all the tracks and cars too.

Pricing is key, micropayments unjustly attacked

[SuperKendall]

Indeed as the story points out, pricing is the key to this being good or evil for us as consumers.

If the game sells at half price to start, and I can buy just the cars I like and all the tracks at a price lower than most of the other retail titles - then the idea will be a good one for the game designers and consumers alike.

But outside of that, automatic mistrust of micropayments that seems to be rampant in responses to this story smacks of luddite thinking. Is not this the future we wanted, to be able to buy things in small components and assemble them as we wish? Greed may or may not enter into it but as a gamer the ability to buy a custom variety of tracks (some perhaps user designed!!) and cars is appealing.

But then again, it came from Sony so all of the normal interest in technology is turned topsy-turvy in bloodlust to see Sony fall. What a shame there are not more pure gamers and enlightened technical thinkers about Slashdot nowadays rather than having the populace fall to the Herd Mind of Rage which is all too popular in so many areas of thought these days. Far easier to demonize than engage in rational thought, I guess.

Re:Pricing is key, micropayments unjustly attacked

[grumbel]

If the game sells at half price to start, and I can buy just the cars I like and all the tracks at a price lower than most of the other retail titles - then the idea will be a good one for the game designers and consumers alike.

The trouble is that this system turns classic rewards in video games on its head. Back in the arcade you had to insert a coint when you failed a level, with this new system you have to insert a coin when you beat it. So success will be punished instead of rewarded, could be a great way to let motivation drop down quite a bit, even if the total money wouldn't be that different.

I don't think there is anything wrong with micropayment in itself, in fact I think its great for true additional content, but designers have to be very care full to not turn it into an annoyancy. The system in GT HD doesn't sound like they sell you additional content, it sounds like they sell you content you would have gotten with the game for 'free' a few years ago. This again has little todo with actual money, even so they probally wouldn't do it if they could gain more profit from it, but much more with psychology. Gaming should be first and for most fun, being forced to think about paying for the next level or track however isn't something that I would consider fun, I simply don't want to be bothered by such things when playing the game.

Good and Bad...

[mitchell_pgh]

Like most technologies, I can see the good and bad of this.

I'm fine with the developers expanding a game (in an incremental way as compared to major expansion packs) after the initial release, but the initial release MUST be a complete gaming experience. To release an incomplete game (no cars or courses as given in the example) and expect users to buy additional components to make the game playable is ridiculous.

I'm sure this will be sold as a "feature" and will be explained away with "why FORCE users to buy items that they don't want or need," but to me it sounds like a lovely way to force you to sign up for a "service."

what about kids?

[torrija]

Is this game going to be restricted to people with credit cards?

Only way...

[Kaenneth]

Only way I could see this working, is if the base game were a pack-in with the console.

Then it's a 'free demo' that everyone can try out, even if they (like me) don't currently care for racing games.

only because you missed it

[YesIAmAScript]

MS sold additional maps for Halo 2. MS sold cars for PGR2 on Xbox years ago. They have sold two packs of cars on PGR3 for 360. They sold an upgrade for GRAW for $15 that is basically mandatory if you want to play online, because if you don't buy it you can't play in games hosted by people who bought the upgrade, even if they don't use any maps that came with the upgrade.

They sold a Santa outfit for the main character in Kameo.

They sell custom player icons for a few bucks. These icons are mostly ads for games.

They are readying new technology for October that allows developers to see you consumables in game. So they can sell you something, have it wear out and SELL IT TO YOU AGAIN.

I can understand not knowing the last part, but the rest just shows you aren't paying any attention. If you were looking at everything that is going on, MS would have made your hit list long before Sony.

Re:Call the Whaaaaambulance!

[slowbad]

it'll be interesting to see how this works out.

Parent buys a Microsoft/Sony title for their kid, grumbling how expensive it is.
The expensive XP-Plus/GranTurismo has lost the kid's attention after 3 days.
Kid tells parent they must buy more fish/cars for $100 total or it is all a waste.
Parent remembers quite well to never, ever buy anything from Microsoft/Sony.

Meet the New Boss..

[PopeRatzo]

Of course, limiting second-hand sales does impact the market. The harder it is to buy second-hand games, the more likely it is to find them available via BitTorrent, nicely cracked and proper.

The torrent version of Half-Life 2 even had a fancy optimizer (not sold by Valve) that made the game run faster and fixed a few bugs. I'm still waiting to see the first game that can't be diddled to defeat the copy protection or online authentication. Or maybe it's already come along but nobody cared (or bought the title).

I say, let these foolish content providers destroy themselves with more onerous methods of limiting the value of their games to the second-hand market. It will give us a new generation of creative young people who will be our next software designers. And other companies will come along that embrace their customers and the after-market market that provides us with a longer life for our games in the form of mods and patches.

Most of you aren't old enough to remember the motto of merchants in the past: "The Customer is Always Right" - a motto that made them successful and their customers happy. These rapacious bastards have embraced the opposite approach to the people that keep them in business.

In defense of Oblivion

[Sycraft-fu]

The things like horse armour are 100% optional. It's mainly cosmetic and is just kinda silly. There is still an entire very massive game to play without it. It's not like you need horse armour to access any special content. You pays your money for the game, you get tons of entertainment out of it, no additional purchase necessary. Also, on the PC at least, you can mod the shit out of it for free. There are tons of fan created mods that cost nothing. The game not only allows it, but is designed to make it real easy to do.

What is being proposed for GT would be like selling things in Oblivion on a per quest basis. "Oh you want to do that quest? That'll be $1 please.". In Oblivion they give you plenty for your money, I mean the game is very large, very rich, and very detailed. They are just also willing to sell you some additional content. It's not really worth it and is mostly for show, but if you wish to spend the money fine. However they aren't trying to decrease your experience and require that you buy it.

Re:In defense of Oblivion

[Lord_Dweomer]

Bingo. This is why I have been against micro-transactions in games from the beginning. Its not that the system can't work, its that the companies in the industry are too greedy to let it work successfully. Another part of it is cultural. I know in the east, like Korea, these types of things are kind of expected and well accepted. But in America, we tend to feel that if we purchase something, we own it, and if you want us to pay more for parts of it you're bloody nickle and diming us. And that is indeed how I feel. I even objected to the horse armor even though it was optional. The fact of the matter was that it was something that SHOULD have been included in the game that they quite obviously scraped to sell later.

And ultimately that is the problem with this extremely slippery slope we've been on with extra content for years now. First it started as full fledged expansions, then smaller expansions, then "episodes" and now items. If they CAN scrape the content and sell it later for more, it has been proven they WILL do it. What's next...paying for stats when you roll your character? You want to play with a good character don't you? That'll be 5 bucks more.

And thanks to inflation, you don't have just one product going up in price, suddenly all the micro purchases go up in price.

And the worst part is when buying it gives you an unfair advantage over others. And for those who don't believe this has happened in America yet, I point you to Battlefield 2 and their Special Forces expansion where they let people use those weapons in the regular vanilla game on the ranked servers. And the guns they give have a HUGE advantage.

How to be a happy gamer

[pandrijeczko]

1. Buy a PC and check out the *free* fan mods available on the Internet before you buy any games. That way you get the "best bang for your buck" and can make sure you're playing these games a lot longer than the 2-3 days it takes to complete them.

2. DOSBox is your friend. Just because a game is 10-15 years old without stunning graphics does not make it a bad game. Stop with the Valve / Blizzard fanboy nonsense and just go find some of these old games to try for yourself in an emulator like DOSBox - or go check out PC emulators for other systems.

3. Ignore the peer pressure to have the latest system all of the time. I've just picked up a second Gamecube for £30 and can buy Gamecube games used for around £5 each now. I really don't care that the "graphics are 5 years old", it's the playability of the game that's important, not how nice it looks.

Sure, you may like the idea of "subscription model" games like Warcraft III and Gran Turismo HD and good luck to you. But please don't forget that you're just being railroaded into renting games rather than owning them outright because that way the games companies can crowbar more money out of you through subscriptions and endless upgrades.

Re:batteries not included

[Tim C]

I can't speak for the US, but here in the UK most toys now do come with batteries, while previously they didn't. The change is apparently due to improvements in the shelf life of batteries; before, the batteries would be half-way to useless by the time someone bought the toy and started using it, so there was little point. Battery tech has improved to the point where batteries now have shelf lives measured in years, and it's common for electronic gadgets and toys to include batteries.