the crew The Crew: Car List - [UP29: Mar 1st 2016]

[X8X8X]

Let's hope so!

This game may be epic, but so far I'm not really happy with it's carlist. It basically has "something of everything", but it still is somewhat lacking to me.

Most of the cars are "substitutes" for ones I'd like much more to me...

It's 20 days to the start of the beta, isn't it? Me and a friend of mine (both playing TDU2 at the moment) signed up hoping one of use might get a key...

 

Regards

X8X8X

[chocolatestar]

I'm Guessing for Ferrari.

 

LaFerrari (no brainer)

458 Speciale

F12

California T

Then an old car, something like enzo, f50, etc

[CLR-GTR]

What am I missing in that all of a sudden a small independent gamedeveloper manages to license both Lamborghini and the latest flagship FERRARI in the same game, that ''promotes'' wreckless driving, pursuits, off-roading and vehicle customization?

 

EDIT: I would almost say the SL65 is actually a 63. The underside horizontal trim piece of the center airintake in the front bumper is black. The SL65 had it in the color of the car, the 63 had it in black.

[Ryzza5]

Except that those two cars (and most supercars it seems) won't have Dirt/Raid specs and so will be comparatively quite rubbish offroad (not unlike TDU1).

 

The faster/better a car is stock, the less tuning specs it has generally speaking.

[Andreas¹]

Imagine though having a Raid-spec LaFerrari. I'm not a massive fan of that car but that'd be amazing. xD

[T1M]

I wouldn't mind just getting in a stock LaFerrari, pounding it round a track then come off the track and cruise to the next track. :nods:

 

(so long as there's multiple tracks in game)

[Ryzza5]

There are multiple tracks and speedways in game.

[Reilsss]

That 75 cars could also be counted together if somone has a car more then one time. It was possible to own several cars of the same type in TDU, it was not possible on Driver San Fransico thought.

 

The spec screenshot, could show the specs the player owned at the time of the screenshot, rather then a list of avalible specs.

And if hyper cars only had one or two perfomance specs, I would expect that the big offroad cars like the Ford F150 had only dirt and raid specs... We do know that the F150 has anyhow racing and perfomance specs as well. So that could mean that eeven if it is crazy that hyper cars had also all specs... It would otherwise be maybe a bit unfair balanced. Then again I fail kinda imaging a Offorad 4 by 4 Agera R.

 

Speaking of 4 by 4 saw anyone the specifically made Buggy for the game? For some reason I expect to see something familar to the tdu2 buggy.

 

I'm also not supriced to see Ferrari in a road racing game with police chases. I was supriced with Ferrari in TDU2 because I knew from NFS that Ferrari had his nose up high for that kind of racing... The only thing that suprices me is that you can tune the Ferrari with bodykit(s). But then Bugatti changed there mind over the years when it comes to be in a game... its a great advertisment place for them. And who knows maybe managers switched or something...

 

Also since when is Ubisoft a small and independing developer? Did I miss something?

[MadManCK]

There is a buggy in the game, yes

 

And not all cars can be tuned in every spec.

Part of the reason why there are not more cars in the game so far, is that they have to be modeled for each spec as well. Including all tuning parts and customizing options. And with factory approval for each step.

As each car takes about 6 months average to complete, you can imagine why it is more about quality than quantity.

 

And this is also typically a part of the game that can be extended with future DLC.

[CLR-GTR]

Also since when is Ubisoft a small and independing developer? Did I miss something?

 

I thought it was Ivory Tower developing it and Ubisoft merely publishing it.

[MadManCK]

I thought it was Ivory Tower developing it and Ubisoft merely publishing it.

 

Yes. And with the help of UbiSoft they have teamed up with Reflections and a couple of other developers to finish the game for release.

Ubi has a bigger role than just as publisher.

[Eudemon]

And this is also typically a part of the game that can be extended with future DLC.

You say this like it's a good thing. The fact remains though that people will care more about the number of cars than what they can do to them in regards to off-road and such as is easy to see by just reading around what the general/typical gamer is wanting.

[X8X8X]

My two cents:

More cars over more tuning.

And DLC is the worst word in the history of computer games...

 

Regards

X8X8X

[Eudemon]

DLC could be such a good thing if it wasn't just a cash grab or resulted in cut items being used to sell later at the price they sell for. It completely astounds me when people spend 15-20% of the cost of the full game on content that equals to hardly anything compared to the original title.

[hassan1995]

DLC frustrates me more in some games than in others (forza)

If there is a proper justification for add on content I'm okay with it like the south central pack in midnight club, with games that add it on just for money's sake when they could have added it anyway really gets to me.

[CLR-GTR]

DLC frustrates me more in some games than in others (forza)

If there is a proper justification for add on content I'm okay with it like the south central pack in midnight club, with games that add it on just for money's sake when they could have added it anyway really gets to me.

 

 

Same here. Clear example would be to compare TDU1's DLC cars/bikes (not just megapack but also the handfull console packs), with the DLC's of the Dirt games.... I mean seriously, pay for content already in the game, just unlocked a few hours earlier than through gameplay?

[hassan1995]

Clear cut example of the ridiculous gaming industry, putting a sour taste in gamers.....don't get me started on day one dlc woah I lose it when I see that shizzle

[calster17]

DLC can be good, hell check out R* who so far haven't charged a thing for it! Likewise GT6 and the Vision GT cars! (Where's others would have charged silly prices for it)

 

Also, I'm away for a week and I see apparently TVR are in game! :D If this is true, no prize for guessing what car I'll be using most! ;)

[TheXRacer]

DLC can be good, hell check out R* who so far haven't charged a thing for it! Likewise GT6 and the Vision GT cars! (Where's others would have charged silly prices for it)

This highlights a point that I would like to make. There are two kinds of Downloadable Content: Paid and Free. GTA V, Payday 2 and a few other games I'm sure have adopted a full or partial free DLC policy which in my book is perfectly fine so long as I don't have to utilize my bandwidth to download the remainder of a game which I bought from retail under the impression that it was COMPLETE.

 

Most (lets us be honest here, it's pretty much all) titles adopt the paid DLC route because apparently publishers feel that everything including the game disc itself is not actually owned by us and we deserve to continuously shell out cash to feed their dirty spending habit because "it's OK" according to the average six year old child who is in unlawful possession of their parents' credit card.

 

Paid DLC can be OK if I'm not paying upwards of ten sterling for four poorly designed maps and a weapon skin(you know what I'm referring to), which are content that could have been in the game on release.

 

Free DLC DOES exist and in my opinion should be a mandatory policy on all digital distribution platforms because it forces publishers to stop making their devs cut content to up their profit margin.

[Eudemon]

GTA V do free DLC but with the intent of pushing their microtransactions, this is easy to see with the way they are constantly stretching out the ways to make decent money in the game. The Rooftop Rumble and Coveted missions in particular have been made lengthier and harder to complete and the prices of things is way above what it should be. Why do you only get 50% back on an apt you sell for example? Why do only certain upgrades on your car make up the cost and others are just premium with no monetary return?

 

Answer: To make you need to grind and to make their cash cards attractive.

 

This is the problem with where we are at now, publishers aim for their game to be played by the masses but they want to make that playtime be somewhat annoying and tedious and keep some of the good stuff away from players to entice them to spend more real money on digital money. Ten years and beyond it was all about cheat codes for cheap progression and laughs, now it's all about DLC and microtransactions and that's damn right upsetting.

 

Very few do get it right, most though deliberately aim to get it wrong (ioo not theirs).

[MadManCK]

DLC could be such a good thing if it wasn't just a cash grab or resulted in cut items being used to sell later at the price they sell for. It completely astounds me when people spend 15-20% of the cost of the full game on content that equals to hardly anything compared to the original title.

 

Only thing i really do not like is 0-Day DLC. That always feels like a rip-off.

For the rest is DLC a good way to get more content, gameplay, missions, locations even. Can be cool.

 

I know that for The Crew the extended developing time has been used, not only to polish the game, but also to get more licenses (Ferrari is one of them) and prepare some DLC as well.

 

It is a good way to get things going after the game has been released.

The Crew is also unique in the way the game world can be updated from the studio. Some patches and updates can be applied directly at the studio.

 

Another point of concern has been the introduction of micro transactions. Something you usually see with free-to-play games. You will have to buy the better gear or car to be able to win.

In The Crew there is no pay-to-win. You can unlock more cars at your own level faster.

I see these Micro transactions as a kind of cheatcodes. But this time they are provided by the developers. For a price. For the impatient or players with little time.

 

A project like this, that will be 7 years under way at the time of release, is expensive.

And IMO it is not a game you play for just a few weeks.

If they continue to upgrade the game, release cool new DLC, i think it is a good thing.

It will keep the game in top condition and the players happy for a long time.

 

So DLC can be a good thing for The Crew :cool:

[The Compensator]

DLC could be a good thing if the game studios and publishers were not selling you basically an incomplete game and then wanting you to pay for something that should had been in the essential version.

[Ozzmcom]

only acceptable dlc is the free dlc. We're already paying a ridiculous amount for a full game.

[hassan1995]

Dlc can be good at times look at cartain games, midnight club, burnout paradise and most h a l o games where they add various maps that couldn't be there in the initial release

[Eudemon]

only acceptable dlc is the free dlc. We're already paying a ridiculous amount for a full game.

Not really, games have actually stayed around the same price despite inflation and such, perhaps in the UK we're lucky that there is so much competition which sees our prices dive after a month to six-weeks but if you look elsewhere they stay at the top end for a long while. Then if you consider the budget of a game today say a lowly €25m, then to break even they need to sell probably around 3-4 million and the publisher of course takes most of that anyway as they are the ones bankrolling the game.

 

DLC is all well and good when done right and priced-accordingly with what is being offered, timesaver packs are not cool if the game has been padded out to make these a favourable option to any player due to the main game either being so dull or stretching out the payments or rewards to near frustration levels.

 

Ubisoft are not angels in this regard, look at what AC IV Season Pass got you and there was a recent interview with a top man at Ubisoft saying our "resistance" is being dwindled and players are more "accepting" of DLC. Nope we hate most of it, we hate the talk of DLC before a game is even out, we hate the obvious removals to sell later as DLC and we hate what DLC has become compared to what it was originally sold to us as. I also saw a mention of the Trials game and how the first game gave so much DLC content for it's money compared to the newly published under Ubisoft one, think it said something like 75% less. They do have their bright-sparks though - see Blood Dragon and was that not an incredible success too?

 

But hey as long as the money is rolling-in and stupid people continue to make it worthwhile it's not going to stop.