PC1 Divided Project Cars player base in the future because of DLC?

[Fationably Late]

Hey, brand new member here. I and not a WMD member (otherwise I'd be posting in those forums), but I've been searching far and wide to find out some info.

I am trying to find information on how SMS plans to NOT split the community when in regards to new cars and tracks further down the line. What I mean is, all the other racing games/sims seem to divide their community because of the way they handle new tracks and cars via dlc. So if you buy a 'car pack' and your friend doesn't, your friend can never race with you if you use a car from the dlc (Codemasters is the worst at this: people w/o dlc can't even join you if you turn on 'Allow DLC' and never use any of the cars/tracks). How is SMS going to deal with this scenario?

**To put this in perspective, Evolve let's you play with anyone, on any map, with any character, regardless if you own them or not (I presume it's because they install each one on your client anyway).

 

[Kyle Pearson]

To be honest, no one (aside from SMS themselves) know. There are really only a few ways to make it work:

1. All files are distributed to all installations, but only 'activated' if the user has paid. This allows the user to be able to join servers without having to have purchased the same content. However, this just means there will be a hack released which unlocks the vehicles for those not purchasing.

2. Have an online only system like iRacing which controls the content to avoid the above hacking (which we already know they don't have).

3. Have the models which the user doesn't have access to show up as a default ghost image. Likely not the best user experience.

4. Force everyone in a race to all have the same content. Divides the community but provides the best most predictable play experience.

Granted, this only works for "vehicles". There isn't really anything you can do about tracks. You can't allow people who didn't purchase a pack which may have tracks to drive on them by having a "friend" who did buy them always "host".

 

[Fationably Late]

I suppose if all future tracks were always free, but support the game in the long term with paid car packs (which unlock if paid for, but available to race against), that may work to keep the community together. I agree that trying to come up with a solution that makes sense, both for the business and the community, is a difficult achievement. In the short term, meaning in the coming months (or even the rest of the year), I don't see my concern being an issue, since there's already so much content and features to feast on.

 

[Sicario Del Toro]

Lot of info here .

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

1. All files are distributed to all installations, but only 'activated' if the user has paid. This allows the user to be able to join servers without having to have purchased the same content. However, this just means there will be a hack released which unlocks the vehicles for those not purchasing.

Have R3E been hacked? If not, this works.

 

[Kyle Pearson]

Have R3E been hacked?

Unfortunately, anything created by man, can be hacked. If you have access to the physical files, you can unlock them unless there is an online component which can block them (like iRacing). If R3E has an online component similar to iRacing (i.e. it's not peer to peer), then that's a point at which you can enforce these types of protection where they cannot be hacked. I'm not familiar enough with R3E's infrastructure to know how they are setup to say that is or isnt what's happening.

However, I design software security for a living so I can confidently say what will or will not work.

 

[David Wright]

If you produce a sim like pCARs (or iRacing or rFactor or R3E or AC) where you cover a huge variety of racing from 60s F1 cars to road cars to modern GTs to NASCAR etc etc the community is bound to be divided simply by the kind of car/racing they are interested in.

I would suggest the best way of keeping division to a minimum is to sell DLC which is appropriately "grouped" as R3E are doing, rather than a pack of 4 or 5 very different cars. Then fans of a genre are more likely to own all the cars in that genre.

 

[Fationably Late]

If you produce a sim like pCARs (or iRacing or rFactor or R3E or AC) where you cover a huge variety of racing from 60s F1 cars to road cars to modern GTs to NASCAR etc etc the community is bound to be divided simply by the kind of car they are interested in.

I would suggest the best way of keeping division to a minimum is to sell DLC which is appropriately "grouped" as R3E are doing, rather than a pack of 4 or 5 very different cars. Then fans of a genre are more likely to own all the cars in that genre.

This make perfect sense and I could get behind this. I just started getting into R3E and I agree with their structure of keeping 'like' cars together and even keeping real life series cars together.

 

[Kyle Pearson]

I would suggest the best way of keeping division to a minimum is to sell DLC which is appropriately "grouped" as R3E are doing, rather than a pack of 4 or 5 very different cars. Then fans of a genre are more likely to own all the cars in that genre.

That is the goal, when possible. i.e. they want to have an oval racing DLC which includes both vehicles and tracks for that racing discipline.

 

[Lorenzo Bonder]

That is the goal, when possible. i.e. they want to have an oval racing DLC which includes both vehicles and tracks for that racing discipline.

But my question would be, if this is planned, would we have to empty our pockets a bit more to acquire that pack or would SMS just add it naturally without a cost as a part of a massive game update.

If they go with the paid DLC way, I hope they do it like R3E is doing. It properly divides the player audience. It's a matter of seeing where this will go after the game is released.

 

[Kyle Pearson]

But my question would be, if this is planned, would we have to empty our pockets a bit more to acquire that pack or would SMS just add it naturally without a cost as a part of a massive game update.

If they go with the paid DLC way, I hope they do it like R3E is doing. It properly divides the player audience. It's a matter of seeing where this will go after the game is released.

I'm not part of the SMS staff and they aren't here posting, but my impressions of what can be expected:

* Free software updates for bugs and platform level enhancements
* Free "car of the month" for an un-yet-specified duration
* Paid DLC for new cars
* Paid DLC for new tracks

How the DLC will be offered and delivered specifically has not be discussed with the community (nor do I think it will). Technically, the DLC is and will be created with funds not from the original crowdsourcing.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

How does that work with the "return of investement" thingy? Income from DLC, late buys due to game + DLC packs etc.?

 

[Kyle Pearson]

How does that work with the "return of investement" thingy? Income from DLC, late buys due to game + DLC packs etc.?

There is no more crowd funding for Project CARS 1. There is no funding at this time for Project CARS 2, either. You are blowing that whole pCARS 2 thing out of proportion. At some point, which SMS haven't determined when, there will be an entirely new model for their second iteration of their franchise. Right now, the focus is on Project CARS 1 as there are still game features which didn't make the initial release but will be added into the sim with future updates (non-DLC updates). Along with those game features, they want to keep the platform fresh with new content (ala DLC). Some of the DLC is work that is already in progress (i.e. 2015 Ford Mustang), and some of it is unseen work (which even the community members haven't seen).

The DLC work is funded by SMS solely so that's their own investment.