Gran Tursimo 5 Servers Go Offline, DLC Gone Forever

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Adam Jensen:
When I said that this would happen if we let the publishers brainwash us into thinking that always online is a good thing, I was bombed with "that's a slippery slope argument herpa derp". It's even happening to games that aren't always online.

YOU CANNOT ALLOW THE PUBLISHERS THIS KIND OF CONTROL OVER YOUR PROPERTY! GAMES ARE NOT A SERVICE JUST BECAUSE PUBLISHERS WANT THEM TO BE. DON'T BUY INTO THEIR CRAP!

Now imagine if they only made always online games in the future, and if you refused to buy the DLC, your game gets cut off and it won't work in offline mode? That's the sort of future they want. Customers forced to part with their cash to play. The subscription service of some online games made them greedy because they realised that instead of releasing full games with some expansion packs, they figured they could carve up the game and sell it in bits and pieces, and get you to pay to keep enjoying the game.

It won't be long before you're buying a game with no gameplay or textures for $100 followed by a texture and colour pack for $20 followed by a gameplay pack that allows you to enjoy the game for $30. Then you'll get the game of the year edition with everything in it (in other words, the COMPLETE game) for $140 in a Steam sale.

People say we're not forced into buying games or we can play something else, but no one tells you beforehand "the servers will be offline in a year or three". There is no way to predict when the company would pull support for a game. You buy it hoping it will be an enjoyable experience (hopefully for a bit longer than 3 years if it's that sort of game) and they tend to advertise their online component to get you playing with your friends. When they remove a key aspect of it (a server in this case), they're not refunding you for any DLC that was required for that aspect to work. In fact, they're kicking the consumer in the nads for having the audacity to buy their product and pay for their additional content.

Always online will create problems. They will promote subscription services for more games, in other words, you don't pay, you don't play. Essentially this would be a deposit before renting the game. Your $60 will get you the game, but you would then have to pay an additional $15 a month to keep playing it. This would then allow them to keep making DLC (which wouldn't be free) and extend even "single player" games for at least a year or two before their dodgy sequels came along. It's the reason Borderlands 2 had so many DLCs. It is the reason more games have DLCs these days than ever before.

The future of gaming seems to be more about getting down to business and less about having serious fun.

Glad I never bought this game or its DLC, but still, this fucking sucks... Why is this Ok? I dread to think what would happen if something like team fortress 2 or warframe servers were to shut down.

Doubt they will but still, Warframe requires you log in to play, and Tf2 relies on item servers, so if you aren't connected to the internet you won't have your items...

Just sad to see this happen, and this is DEFINITELY a valid concern for gamers that are buying games currently, for all we know as soon as the game "outlives its usefulness" it will be unplayable...

Of course the makers of the game will just tell you "Ehh just go buy the next one ok"

Great after abandoning a game you're excuse is to go buy the sequel...

*sigh* just sad to see this type of thing become reality

MeTalHeD:

Adam Jensen:
When I said that this would happen if we let the publishers brainwash us into thinking that always online is a good thing, I was bombed with "that's a slippery slope argument herpa derp". It's even happening to games that aren't always online.

YOU CANNOT ALLOW THE PUBLISHERS THIS KIND OF CONTROL OVER YOUR PROPERTY! GAMES ARE NOT A SERVICE JUST BECAUSE PUBLISHERS WANT THEM TO BE. DON'T BUY INTO THEIR CRAP!

Now imagine if they only made always online games in the future, and if you refused to buy the DLC, your game gets cut off and it won't work in offline mode? That's the sort of future they want. Customers forced to part with their cash to play. The subscription service of some online games made them greedy because they realised that instead of releasing full games with some expansion packs, they figured they could carve up the game and sell it in bits and pieces, and get you to pay to keep enjoying the game.

It won't be long before you're buying a game with no gameplay or textures for $100 followed by a texture and colour pack for $20 followed by a gameplay pack that allows you to enjoy the game for $30. Then you'll get the game of the year edition with everything in it (in other words, the COMPLETE game) for $140 in a Steam sale.

People say we're not forced into buying games or we can play something else, but no one tells you beforehand "the servers will be offline in a year or three". There is no way to predict when the company would pull support for a game. You buy it hoping it will be an enjoyable experience (hopefully for a bit longer than 3 years if it's that sort of game) and they tend to advertise their online component to get you playing with your friends. When they remove a key aspect of it (a server in this case), they're not refunding you for any DLC that was required for that aspect to work. In fact, they're kicking the consumer in the nads for having the audacity to buy their product and pay for their additional content.

Always online will create problems. They will promote subscription services for more games, in other words, you don't pay, you don't play. Essentially this would be a deposit before renting the game. Your $60 will get you the game, but you would then have to pay an additional $15 a month to keep playing it. This would then allow them to keep making DLC (which wouldn't be free) and extend even "single player" games for at least a year or two before their dodgy sequels came along. It's the reason Borderlands 2 had so many DLCs. It is the reason more games have DLCs these days than ever before.

The future of gaming seems to be more about getting down to business and less about having serious fun.

Darkspore is already unplayable due to abandoned always on DRM, just thought I'd throw that out their, not a very good game, but still its unplayable to those who bought it unless they somehow manage to hack past the always on DRM in it

Casual Shinji:
I'm glad I'm not a fan of Gran Turismo, and I'm glad I'm not a fan of DLC.

But really, holy shit, this quickly already?! Now maybe I'm wrong, but aren't Demon's Souls servers still active? A game that's older.
I mean what's the reasoning for killing GT's servers this soon? Is it costing them bucket loads or something?

Indeed they are.

I do remember talks of taking them down sometime after the launch of Dark Souls, but the community outcried, and they (not sure who "they" in this case is) rescinded, stating the servers would stay open for as long as there was an active community playing it. Two years after that there is still a community playing the game, which sees some punctual lease of life whenever the game's on PS+.

Here, though, I am guessing there's no reasoning other than "we have GT6 out, go and spend money there", much after those lovely EA Sports business practices.

Genocidicles:
Here it is. The future of gaming.

I'm already wondering what the outcry will be like if something like Mass Effect loses all of its DLC.

well, if the future of gaming is indeed games as a service rather than a product, then part of that is indeed them somewhen cancelling their service so you buy into their next service.
I don't like it but I fear this is what it will sadly come to as a general business practice. A better solution would be keeping it online, obviously.

I just wonder how big the outcry will be when that one rather recent racing game with the very expensive DLC cars does the same. (can't remember its name)

Adam Jensen:
YOU CANNOT ALLOW THE PUBLISHERS THIS KIND OF CONTROL OVER YOUR PROPERTY! GAMES ARE NOT A SERVICE JUST BECAUSE PUBLISHERS WANT THEM TO BE. DON'T BUY INTO THEIR CRAP!

We're going to have a hard time changing that so long as you're buying a license and not a copy of a game under the law.

One of the many reasons that IP law needs to be drastically overhauled.

KingsGambit:
Give us back privately hosted servers on the PC, arseholes. I hate that they can flip a switch and kill a game like this. Why do console gamers give these people money?

Because they haven't seen the light of the master race and converted. But soon they will.

They will.

rofltehcat:
well, if the future of gaming is indeed games as a service rather than a product, then part of that is indeed them somewhen cancelling their service so you buy into their next service.
I don't like it but I fear this is what it will sadly come to as a general business practice. A better solution would be keeping it online, obviously.

I just wonder how big the outcry will be when that one rather recent racing game with the very expensive DLC cars does the same. (can't remember its name)

Exactly. They need to try doing this to a really popular game. Maybe that will provoke enough of an outcry for them to reconsider shit like this.

Otherwise I guess I'm going to stick to DRM free games.

Sony is pathetic for all these server shut downs for games which aren't that old really.

Meanwhile Forza 2 servers are still online.

So now the only way to get these will be the illegal way (downloading). well done Sony, you just ran your fans into piracy.

Vivi22:
One of the many reasons that IP law needs to be drastically overhauled.

There is no IP law. IP isnt even a real word actually. We got copyright, patent and trademark laws, which do need to be overhauled.
There is no IP law. "intelectual property" is a madeup buzzword.

Genocidicles:
Here it is. The future of gaming.

I'm already wondering what the outcry will be like if something like Mass Effect loses all of its DLC.

Already happened. Can't get the Sky is Falling DLC any more so now I can't get my old save games to work since I had to reinstall my OS since they took it offline.

Strazdas:

There is no IP law. IP isnt even a real word actually. We got copyright, patent and trademark laws, which do need to be overhauled.
There is no IP law. "intelectual property" is a madeup buzzword.

Spot on. Its nice to see i am not the only one who understand this :).

This is totally pathetic, 3 years? If you are going to do that i think you should let everyone who has a copy download the DLC for free in one package, all of it, at least then they can get the most out of the product that they own.

I recently found out (due to a service outage) that the DLC on Castlestorm goes away without a connection even if your console is the same one you downloaded it on. I even redownloaded it after I got my internet back to test it and I still lost the DLC.

So, I kinda figured that this would happen to a major game at some point as well.

alj:
Spot on. Its nice to see i am not the only one who understand this :).

This is totally pathetic, 3 years? If you are going to do that i think you should let everyone who has a copy download the DLC for free in one package, all of it, at least then they can get the most out of the product that they own.

yes, there seems to be a few people with this mindset at the escapist at least. Not always get heard though.

I think i read a quite nice proposal for these situations that could be ammended into copyright laws when (if) we ever overhaul them. A company should support the product or let others do that. This means that if a company refuses to sell thep roduct/hold servers/ect others should be allowed to legally provide these services for the players and it would not be considered copyright infringement. Sort of like how patent abandonment works but with copyright. Of course there needs to be a timeframe set for company to take action if they plan to or something, but it shouldnt be something completely crazy like our current 95 years of copyright.

anyone passionate about GT already jumped ship to GT6 (a superior product in every way possible) , this is non issue.

Genocidicles:
Here it is. The future of gaming.

I'm already wondering what the outcry will be like if something like Mass Effect loses all of its DLC.

The future of gaming? Pfft. This has been happening for a while now. Monster Hunter on the PS2 was one of the first to rip online server out of the game.

If I were petty, I would say something sarcastic like "So, removing DLC and shutting down servers to make people buy the new game is 'for the players', huh?".

I'm not that petty, though, but it's still pretty stupid that the servers shut down so quickly.

It's going to be like the great Ebay Flappy Bird invasion of 2014 all over again. "PS3 W/ALL GT5 DLC!" [email protected]@K! ONLY $83,000!

This is old news that was announced way back in December. For the record it was announced alongside the closure of the Resistance: Fall of Man, Resistance 2 and Resistance 3 servers if that bothers anyone.

Honestly, I don't get the outrage. Or the outrage from PC gamers on their pedestal's. EA could do the same to any of their games on Origin. Servers can go down on any platform and DLC can be removed. It's not console specific.

Here's EA's list which includes PC games: http://www.ea.com/1/service-updates

I know 3 years is not a lot, but this is really over the top. 2K shutdown the servers for their yearly franchise NBA2k and NBA2k13 servers SHUT DOWN IN NOVERMBER!

How long as that been out?

I never buy digital for the record. Not on my consoles or my PC. Pains me greatly to use Steam.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here