PDA

View Full Version : How much do the licenses cost



Stewy32
04-01-2018, 17:42
Just wondering as I have been thinking about it.

We frequently hear that "the Ferrari license is very expensive" or similar stuff about other manufacturers or tracks so how mich do they actually cost.I'm not asking SMS to say they paid x $14646.98 or whatever just a general y is £5k,z is Ä12k so I get a feel for how expensive content is.

Ian Bell
04-01-2018, 17:45
Just wondering as I have been thinking about it.

We frequently hear that "the Ferrari license is very expensive" or similar stuff about other manufacturers or tracks so how mich do they actually cost.I'm not asking SMS to say they paid x $14646.98 or whatever just a general y is £5k,z is €12k so I get a feel for how expensive content is.

We can pay over 100K for a prestige license. Including a cut of sales revenue. Sometimes higher if sales are high.

Invincible
04-01-2018, 17:45
I don't know the figures but I think in total well north of 250k for the Ferrari license.

Edit: ninja'd by the big boss himself

Stewy32
04-01-2018, 18:10
Thanks Ian and Invincible.

Stewy32
04-01-2018, 20:27
Anything about the track cost or less important manafacturers

And the cost to program cars,tracks,liveries etc.

Ossnott
04-01-2018, 20:37
We can pay over 100K for a prestige license. Including a cut of sales revenue. Sometimes higher if sales are high.
Wow, that's a lot!! :eek:
Had never thought it was that high!!
Especially if you consider that the brands actually getting paid and advertised at the same time!.. .

bmanic
04-01-2018, 21:15
I still think it's a total ripoff. Car manufacturers need to pay the game developers, not the other way around. Mark my words: This will happen sooner or later. Gaming is becoming such a huge part of culture. You don't see TV networks paying Merc or Audi to run adds of their cars on the telly. Once it happens it'll start snowballing.

Heck my youngest son knows all the car brands and exactly what he likes best due to games.. which in turn means that if he is even a bit successful later in his adult life he'll probably end up being brand loyal at that point. Gaming is a HUGE investment for brand loyalty.. it's ridiculous that this isn't understood or appreciated.

Partially the same is true for racing venues. They can tremendously boost the value of their venue by being in racing games, especially smaller venues that run trackdays.

sbtm
04-01-2018, 21:25
I heard from an Interview with the Porsche licence manager guy, that they (Porsche) only charge money for their people's time they have to invest to support the licencee with data and infos (like engineers gathering CAD data, looking up data from historical cars, working up the data for the licencee and supporting them).
He said they don't want to earn money with licenses, they just want to cover their expenses. and they see the failure they made with EA and that they want to be featured in many sims.

I wonder if this is true for Porsche. Maybe that's a reason why Raceroom also could afford the licence :)

Herege
04-01-2018, 21:28
These values are a total rip-off. Trademarks should see games as an investment, publicity, influence on players / buyers. As someone said, the brands are what they should pay to have the models represented in games, and thus, make the product cheaper for the customer. Until they come as advertising investment, but only as a source of income things hardly change. or there are cheaper / moderate values.

By the way, are these values per game / version, or are they held for life by the company that buys the rights, for example SMS, and use them in all versions ?

satco1066
04-01-2018, 23:04
I still think it's a total ripoff. Car manufacturers need to pay the game developers, not the other way around. Mark my words: This will happen sooner or later. Gaming is becoming such a huge part of culture. You don't see TV networks paying Merc or Audio to run adds of their cars on the telly. Once it happens it'll start snowballing.

Heck my youngest son knows all the car brands and exactly what he likes best due to games.. which in turn means that if he is even a bit successful later in his adult life he'll probably end up being brand loyal at that point. Gaming is a HUGE investment for brand loyalty.. it's ridiculous that this isn't understood or appreciated.

Partially the same is true for racing venues. They can tremendously boost the value of their venue by being in racing games, especially smaller venues that run trackdays.

Don't think this becomes true.
Ferrari, McLaren or Lamborghini will not sell one more exclusive million dollar car to that millions of gamerboys .
Thats why we have to pay for it. Every shirt, bag, towel, cap, whatever, has to be paid by us.
We are that little dreamers who pay and carry their expensive give aways for free.
So, they'll never make gifts to us.
why do we have to pay for it? Sex sells ;) . As driving poor mans Ferrari thingy in our cheap games is sexy.
Thats most of us can afford to be "cooool".
Lease one of this hypercars for three days and you pay more than getting a full featured Sim Rig. So we'll pay for it, now and in the future.

bmanic
04-01-2018, 23:25
That kind of thinking is exactly why it's the way it is right now but it wont last. IMHO it's very naive and not at all forward thinking. I can't really think of any other business where brand recognition isn't valued. Just look at the gaming explosion. We are talking about serious mainstream money and visibility here. Once gaming is the defacto mega-massive money and influence maker, which it is inevitably going to be if things continue the way they gone so far, then it's only a matter of time.

It has all to do with power and how the "audience" interprets things. Once the audience starts twisting the narrative to; "huh? why does this brand not pay for being in the game? Are they poor? Do they have shitty cars?" then it will quickly flip around. Keep in mind that trends change over several generations and one trend that is accelerating like crazy is the influence that games have over consumers. Games are becoming really quite serious in shaping the future generations thinking and values, just like TV did for the previous several generations.. and radio before that. Once young kids start thinking that only cool cars and car companies are in the game it can very quickly flip.. Ferrari missing in the game? The publisher/game developer, once they have enough power and influence, can simply state in an interview "Yeah, Ferrari didn't want to pay for the priviledge of being in our game, which is unfortunate" and that's that. Then the consumers start thinking "oh man, Ferrari seems like a really bad brand..". Even if that particular consumer could never afford or would never buy a Ferrari, the masses thinking "it's a bad brand" will influence those that actually do consider buying a sports car.

So yeah, like I said. Mark my words. Lets see in 20 - 30 years if we are still alive by then, how it all went down. I'm quite confident in my prediction. Wouldn't be the first time I'm right about these sort of things. :)

Example: People thought I was crazy back in the early 90's when I said gaming will become the biggest and highest grossing entertainment and media industry in the world, eclipsing everything else. The typical "only nerds play computer games" answer seems rather naive and archaic in todays world, yet that was the case back then. I seem to have a knack for predicting these things. Was right about gaming, mobile phones, touch screens, Project CARS (put all my savings in it and never even thought it was a gamble.. told every one of my friends and family.. nobody believed me, now I'm the one laughing.. again), music industry failing and streaming becoming huge etc.

The only huge thing I know I missed, that I dismissed, was bitcoin. That cost me dearly as I had a couple of them way back in the early days. :p

.. oh and I missed the boom of the internet. I did predict it would be huge (email blew my mind) but I was way off on how quickly it all went and I also missed how important html/www would become. I thought it was all going to be about email and instant messaging/chatting (well, I sort of was ahead of it all then as we are indeed going the instant messaging route more now than ever before).

Ryzza5
04-01-2018, 23:40
The 'ad on telly' analogy might not be as good as say likening it to certain cars appearing distinctively in movies. I don't know which way it works, or perhaps there are exceptions meaning that it works both ways depending on the movie/franchise. For example, who paid who to have Tony Stark (Avengers/Iron Man) in a bunch of Audi's (perhaps even exclusively)? On the flip side, a smaller movie like that Sweeny one where Top Gear 'helped' film the car chases, apparently the movie budget paid for the Fords and Jaguars.

peterCars
05-01-2018, 01:07
I guess we should be grateful that we don't have to pay per play to use their cars...or get sued for wrecking them on online races.

Konan
05-01-2018, 01:07
My (humble) view on this is:
If car manufacturers ask this much for their licenses i feel it's a bit unfair for them to add restrictions of what the developer can do with it on top of that...
Not talking about unrealistic things a dev could/would do with them but the fact that some manufacturers ask for unrealistic damage physics...
Like i said though...just my view on it...

balderz002
05-01-2018, 05:30
I can't ever see Ferrari doing anything but demand huge sums for their cars in games. They are a brand that transcends their genre. They are a status brand that everyone can recognise, from joe blogs in his SIM racing rig, to Kim Kardashian on her jimmy choo shopping spree. They get their publicity from all the rich footballers and Hollywood stars rolling round in them.

The fact they always seem to try and push their weight in F1 technical meetings and threaten to quit F1, shows their attitude. Old Enzo was no different back in the day.

A Ferrari licence may cost a lot, but its always going to sell.

Invincible
05-01-2018, 05:48
Regarding Ferrari... If anyone of you has GT Sport and played the single-player: Nearly every time a Ferrari is on the grid in your class, it will be the car which runs for the first place after a couple of laps. Coincidence? I think not.

sp3ctor
05-01-2018, 06:52
I'll put it this way: when I am out in my Mclaren 650s, I have more kids recognize it because they've seen or played it in a game. They know far more about the car (some) than most adults. Sure, that doesn't directly translate into sales but... I was once a kid lusting after the Magnum PI Ferrari or the whale tail 911... so go figure. Also, even indirectly, the more cool a brand is, the better it will sell. So... yeah

Invincible
05-01-2018, 07:25
I'll put it this way: when I am out in my Mclaren 650s, I have more kids recognize it because they've seen or played it in a game. They know far more about the car (some) than most adults. Sure, that doesn't directly translate into sales but... I was once a kid lusting after the Magnum PI Ferrari or the whale tail 911... so go figure. Also, even indirectly, the more cool a brand is, the better it will sell. So... yeah

Congrats on your 650S (and your other cars btw) - most of us know cars from either games, TV shows or car quartet. Need for Speed II for example was the game where I knew the McLaren F1 from and I was completely blown away when I saw one in my hometown when I was 14.
Regarding Ferrari... they're so "cool" with their attitude that even if I could easily afford one, I would ditch them for nearly any other sportscar. Their attitude is just toxic and despicable.

Stewy32
05-01-2018, 07:33
Even Mercedes-AMG probably charge quite a bit.I expect ORECA and Ligier would be about 1/10 of Ferrari's license cost if that but the fictional cars are probably so much cheaper to put in(£5?)

I'm being serious maybe £2k or something like that for Marek and RWD etc.

Stewy32
05-01-2018, 07:36
And games being advertisement.I am still in my teens and one of my earliest memories is the Audi R8 LMP900.I couldn't tell you it was an R8 but I knew it was an Audi racing around Circuit De La Sarthe,France in the 24 hours of Le Mans and I have always been a big Audi fan ever since.

bmanic
05-01-2018, 08:17
I'll put it this way: when I am out in my Mclaren 650s, I have more kids recognize it because they've seen or played it in a game. They know far more about the car (some) than most adults. Sure, that doesn't directly translate into sales but... I was once a kid lusting after the Magnum PI Ferrari or the whale tail 911... so go figure. Also, even indirectly, the more cool a brand is, the better it will sell. So... yeah

This is exactly my point. Brand recognition is extremely important in the long run and the power that games have in boosting this is so immense that the coin will definitely flip at some point. It only takes a single manufacturer to go the other way around, ask a famed studio to "make a game around their brand".. say for instance a future Grand Theft Auto game, where all other makes are fake and slightly odd looking, while one brand is correct and prominently and proudly displayed in the game. The brand then pays the developers to have this privilege and gets the leg-up on the competition in the long run.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one seeing this trend. It's inevitable.. it's going to happen.

bmanic
05-01-2018, 08:21
Regarding Ferrari... they're so "cool" with their attitude that even if I could easily afford one, I would ditch them for nearly any other sportscar. Their attitude is just toxic and despicable.

This has been my opinion of them too for the longest time ever.. if I could ever afford to simply get one of the their cars "on a whim" I'd never do it. I just couldn't. The brand image in my head is so tarnished that even if they created the best car in the world I would feel like a complete tool if I bought one.

The opposite is also true, I have a few brands that I just simply admire and wouldn't hesitate to support if I was in the position to do so, even if their cars may not be the best in the world and even slightly dodgy.

MartinMWWebb
05-01-2018, 08:33
Congrats on your 650S (and your other cars btw) - most of us know cars from either games, TV shows or car quartet. Need for Speed II for example was the game where I knew the McLaren F1 from and I was completely blown away when I saw one in my hometown when I was 14.
Regarding Ferrari... they're so "cool" with their attitude that even if I could easily afford one, I would ditch them for nearly any other sportscar. Their attitude is just toxic and despicable.

Dont let the wookie hear you say that ;) hehe

balderz002
05-01-2018, 09:47
I would love to know what brands class themselves as 'Prestige'!

Stewy32
05-01-2018, 09:59
I'm thinking Ferrari,Porsche,Lamborgini definitely and probably Audi,BMW,Mercedes-Benz and a couple of others.

balderz002
05-01-2018, 10:05
I'm thinking Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini definitely, and probably Audi, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and a couple of others.


Don't forget Aston, Bentley, Pagani.......

Konan
05-01-2018, 10:32
...Saab....

balderz002
05-01-2018, 10:37
...Saab....

Hey! Enough of that, or your out! ;)

Bealdor
05-01-2018, 10:44
Hey! Enough of that, or your out! ;)

248362

:p

Cristi
05-01-2018, 11:57
Car brands such as Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani, Lotus, Aston Martin, and McLaren (and others such as Rolls Royce that are not in the game) are beyond advertising. People don't buy their cars cause they've seen them in a commercial on TV or in some game. In fact, i don't think any of those brands even advertise on TV (i'm perhaps wrong since i don't really watch TV). People buy their cars cause everyone already knows about them and they know what owning one of their cars means. Ferrari especially knows how high profile they are. I can't remember which model it was, but if you bought one of their high level cars, you couldn't take it home. They would keep it for you and deliver it to a track of your choice when you wanted to drive it around. That's how much people want their cars. Porsche, BMW, and Mercedes do have lower priced vehicles that make them most of their money, so they want to advertise to the general public. So some companies should pay game developers for the publicity, but other manufacturers simply don't need publicity. People pay to be seen with famous people, not the other way around.

Zaskarspants
05-01-2018, 12:15
I expect I am in a minority with this view, possibly of one.

I would be happy with all fantasy cars that, freed of restrictions, can be scratched, bent, broken, catch fire and break in noisy oily ways.

banner77amc
05-01-2018, 12:37
This is a good reason to get a Bricklin license or DeTamaso and such... I have a feeling it could be cheep

sp3ctor
05-01-2018, 18:03
Congrats on your 650S (and your other cars btw) - most of us know cars from either games, TV shows or car quartet. Need for Speed II for example was the game where I knew the McLaren F1 from and I was completely blown away when I saw one in my hometown when I was 14.
Regarding Ferrari... they're so "cool" with their attitude that even if I could easily afford one, I would ditch them for nearly any other sportscar. Their attitude is just toxic and despicable.

Thanks! I specifically chose the Mclaren because of the people who drive Ferrari and Lambos here. All things being equal, Iím not a member of that crowd and I donít want to be a member of that crowd. Maybe itís different in other places, but the guys who drive those cars here tend to be people with whom I have nothing in common. However, all things arenít equal with those three brands in my opinion. To me, Mclaren offers more bang for the buck compared to Ferrari and Lamborghini.

I disagree with people who say these brands are beyond advertising. Yes, most people arenít going to see an ad and think ďhmmm I need to buy a MclarenĒ much in the same way people who buy Breitlings, Rolexes, and Omegas arenít typically swayed by an ad. However, even the most known brands - like coke - advertise because having your name out and involved in certain events or places helps keep your brand prestigious. Breitling, for example, isnít going to market in People magazine because thatís not where they want current and future owners to see the brand. Theyíll advertise in up,raker magazines because they know people who own them want to see their watches in those magazines and, more importantly, people who are thinking of buying one also buy those magazines to look at aspirational purchases.

To me, the terrible decision BMW and Benz - to a lesser extent, Porsche - is making in the US is producing lower cost vehicles that cheapen the brand. Here, a 3 series BMW is almost as common as a Honda Accord. I would argue that hurts higher end sales because people who are only interested in having a cool brand car donít want a car most people would mistake for a car that is as common as a Honda.

Cristi
05-01-2018, 18:10
I disagree with people who say these brands are beyond advertising. Yes, most people aren’t going to see an ad and think “hmmm I need to buy a Mclaren” much in the same way people who buy Breitlings, Rolexes, and Omegas aren’t typically swayed by an ad. However, even the most known brands - like coke - advertise because having your name out and involved in certain events or places helps keep your brand prestigious. Breitling, for example, isn’t going to market in People magazine because that’s not where they want current and future owners to see the brand. They’ll advertise in up,raker magazines because they know people who own them want to see their watches in those magazines and, more importantly, people who are thinking of buying one also buy those magazines to look at aspirational purchases.

Coke is somewhat different to Ferrari, i think. There is no prestige associated with drinking Coke. Even with Rolex and Breitling, while they are known to be expensive watches, the statement you make by wearing one is not that visible. People just see you're wearing a watch, and need to take a closer look to see what type of watch it is. With cars, it's different. People see you getting out of a Ferrari. They know it's a Ferrari and they know what getting out of one means. And Ferrari know that. Ferrari aren't looking for customers. Customers are looking for Ferrari. That's why they're beyond advertising.

Pigmachine
05-01-2018, 18:17
I don't remember if the rough amount of the 'Not Sakitto' track were mentioned, in the quite spontaneous Q&A by Ian, on the quite surprised live streaming Youtubers video? But I think it were mentioned as more then a single 'prestige' cars license?

Stewy32
05-01-2018, 19:01
How much do the fictional cars cost e,g. if SMS save £100k that is a good deal for them.

Pigmachine
05-01-2018, 19:10
How much do the fictional cars cost e,g. if SMS save £100k that is a good deal for them.

It would cost credibility and man-hours, and a totally new deformation and damage system.. and fire and death, so a new PEGI classification too. (and the rendering of a pale horse)

bmanic
06-01-2018, 01:08
Car brands such as Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani, Lotus, Aston Martin, and McLaren (and others such as Rolls Royce that are not in the game) are beyond advertising. People don't buy their cars cause they've seen them in a commercial on TV or in some game. In fact, i don't think any of those brands even advertise on TV (i'm perhaps wrong since i don't really watch TV). People buy their cars cause everyone already knows about them and they know what owning one of their cars means. Ferrari especially knows how high profile they are. I can't remember which model it was, but if you bought one of their high level cars, you couldn't take it home. They would keep it for you and deliver it to a track of your choice when you wanted to drive it around. That's how much people want their cars. Porsche, BMW, and Mercedes do have lower priced vehicles that make them most of their money, so they want to advertise to the general public. So some companies should pay game developers for the publicity, but other manufacturers simply don't need publicity. People pay to be seen with famous people, not the other way around.

This is a very short sighted look at the whole thing though. Ferrari has been pushing it's brand very actively since the beginning. It didn't materialize from nothing.. it's been advertised numerous ways.

The brands that don't focus on the coming generations are bound to get neglected and die off. It's happened mutliple times to other seemingly poweful brands that got cocky and hung up on their status. It'll all happen again and again.

sbtm
06-01-2018, 04:31
Today at the car dealer when I waited for the software update for my car, I read a car magazine and there was plenty leasing advertisements for McLaren, Jaguar, Lamborghini, Maserati, Ferrari, Aston Martin....

Yeah.. for the McLaren 570GT .. Pay only 70000€ initial payment and you can lease it for 1700€ per month for 36 months... Limited to 10,000km per year (how can you drive only 10k a year with such a car, I would be on the road 24/7).

breyzipp
06-01-2018, 07:15
My (humble) view on this is:
If car manufacturers ask this much for their licenses i feel it's a bit unfair for them to add restrictions of what the developer can do with it on top of that...
Not talking about unrealistic things a dev could/would do with them but the fact that some manufacturers ask for unrealistic damage physics...
Like i said though...just my view on it...

Hmm I don't know. I do see the point of brands like Audi, Ferrari and Toyota that don't want their cars to appear too heavily modified in games. These guys do want their cars in the games to resemble the real life versions as much as possible. So they do understand the marketing part behind it. :) However I never knew those car licences were that expensive, its a bit rediculous seeing how the developers need to do most/all of the work to get the cars in their games and it's basically free advertising for those brands.

Here is what I have noticed over the years:

1) Ferrari
- In RR3 on mobile the Ferrari cars didn't have as much customization colors as the other brands.
- In FH2/FM6 for the Turn 10 anniversary liveries all cars had the same colorful livery except the Ferrari 458 was plain black.
- NFS 2015 had limited customisation options for Ferrari and the brand is completely absent in the followup game NFS Payback.

2) Audi
- In Dirt 4 the Audi quattro S1 is the only car that has a fixed manufacturer livery and can't be altered like all the other cars.
- In GT:Sport Audi is the ONLY brand in the game that has only real life cars in the game (Gr.3, Gr.4 and Gr.B categories, and no Vision GT whatsoever). To my surprise Ferrari does have a fictional Gr.4 car though.

3) Toyota
- No more Toyota in FM7 and NFS Payback, it's rumored Toyota doesn't want their cars "modified" in games anymore (not sure if that modified means visual or performance). I think the brand might want to get rid of their tuner JDM image since their real life cars are all pretty much boring as well. But hey, on the pro side we still have the 86 family in PCARS 2 (86, GT-86, the Rocket Bunny Street and Rocket Bunny GT4 versions) and the LMP900 and GT1 pair of GT-One's added newly.
- What does make me wonder though, I know during the PCARS 2 reveal period and car list section of the web page being set up, at some point about 80% of all cars were known and on the PCARS 2 page but there were still a few brands missing (like Ferrari and Porsche) which were later introduced via an article or video. Well Toyota was also one of the brands missing, I thought the team was going to do an article about these as well (since the news that Toyota was not in FM7 and Payback was already out at the time) but there was never an article about Toyota as a brand. So that makes me wonder... I think SMS might have been close to not having the Toyota license either, or perhaps the entire deal wasn't set in stone yet and negotiations were still ongoing at the time. I would find it hard to believe the Toyota cars were just left out for no particular reason. Anyone from the developers care to add why the Toyota care were revealed so late in that car list? :)

Konan
06-01-2018, 08:47
At the risk of opening a can of worms...i wasn't talking about modifying.
I was talking about the fact of the "unrealistic damage physics" developers are instructed to uphold.
Some manufacturers want the cars to look as realistic as possible but they don't want them to look as realistic after a crash....?
The knife cuts both ways...
Anyone with some common sense knows these cars don't look like that after a major crash and that is also a factor that makes some people think how petty some manufacturers can be...and that (again my view) is bad advertising.

HockeyNick30
06-01-2018, 14:47
I expect I am in a minority with this view, possibly of one.

I would be happy with all fantasy cars that, freed of restrictions, can be scratched, bent, broken, catch fire and break in noisy oily ways.

I'm with you on that one. I think it might have been one of the earlier Grand Prix games, but I thought it was the coolest thing to be trailing a car that just blew an engine (quick flame out, puff of smoke trailing down the straight). Doesn't seem to exist that way anymore.

SIR_Driftalot
06-01-2018, 22:12
I'll put it this way: when I am out in my Mclaren 650s, I have more kids recognize it because they've seen or played it in a game. They know far more about the car (some) than most adults. Sure, that doesn't directly translate into sales but... I was once a kid lusting after the Magnum PI Ferrari or the whale tail 911... so go figure. Also, even indirectly, the more cool a brand is, the better it will sell. So... yeah

I read somewhere that Japanese car manufacturers will pay Polophony digital big bucks to have one of there cars feature in the starting category as they’ve realised it does amout to high brand recognition and associated sales when people are exposed to them digitally, even forming bonds with them as their ‘first digital car’ in their progress through the game.

I can understand someone like Ferrari having there licenceing quite high, it is a massive selling point for any car lover and sim racer, but I do agree with the above posts that the tide will turn somewhat from the manufacturers paying the game developers for more brand exposure to more consumers, whenever you see a brand logo in a movie, from a soft drink to a high end sports car its a form of marketing bought and payed for by the company in question.
To think this won’t happen in gaming in the future is a little myopic.

snipeme77
07-01-2018, 00:41
I still think it's a total ripoff. Car manufacturers need to pay the game developers, not the other way around. Mark my words: This will happen sooner or later. Gaming is becoming such a huge part of culture. You don't see TV networks paying Merc or Audi to run adds of their cars on the telly. Once it happens it'll start snowballing.

Heck my youngest son knows all the car brands and exactly what he likes best due to games.. which in turn means that if he is even a bit successful later in his adult life he'll probably end up being brand loyal at that point. Gaming is a HUGE investment for brand loyalty.. it's ridiculous that this isn't understood or appreciated.

Partially the same is true for racing venues. They can tremendously boost the value of their venue by being in racing games, especially smaller venues that run trackdays.

in the 1950's Lionel Trains got paid a few thousand dollars by the ATSF to put their paint job on Lionel's toy F7-9 locomotive.

Fast forward to 2000's, Union Pacific sues all the model train manufactures for not acquiring the right licence to make their trains...

Zaskarspants
07-01-2018, 11:40
I'm with you on that one. I think it might have been one of the earlier Grand Prix games, but I thought it was the coolest thing to be trailing a car that just blew an engine (quick flame out, puff of smoke trailing down the straight). Doesn't seem to exist that way anymore.

I think it is true to say that as gaming systems have matured rights holders have done the opposite. As the ability of games to imitate reality has increased the ability of the car manufacturers and rights holders to accept the portrayal of reality has decreased.

This doesn't seem to be an issue for other game genres, but I may be ignorant as I only play pcars and a couple of other racing titles.

pferreirag60
07-01-2018, 14:05
A little bit of topic, but in regard to Ferrari performance and how the cars react in Pcars2, they always are (for me of course) much easier to drive in the limit comparable to the other cars in the same class. But I always have read, heard, that they are not so good as they (Ferrari) would like..So, I ask if they are so good to drive in real life as they drive in this sim?! I am a Fan of Porsche, in my view the best of the best, but in PCars2 I only feel that with both 911 Gt3 and the racing one(missed the Gt4, also very good!). The only classic Porsche that i Like to drive is the 930/935 (brutal :)) as the other ones, I donīt really like the way they respond on track, in the limit they are to much unpredictable.

All this talk of mine, just to ask if Ferrari had more feedback in the way there cars behave in PCars2 ?

Mark Silcock
07-01-2018, 20:55
We can pay over 100K for a prestige license. Including a cut of sales revenue. Sometimes higher if sales are high.

That is actually lower than I expected considering the revenue the game has or will generate. I now can understand how AC can afford all those licenses pre console!

Manufacturers (well known brands) will always charge as they dont like seeing other companies making money from their brand. It's a bit like top musicians playing for free on the biggests Radio Stations because of the coverage they get...... never going to happen.

zedeeyen
07-01-2018, 22:06
On a racing game I worked on many years ago, Mitsubishi insisted that if we wanted to use any of their cars we had to include all of that year's production roster. Unfortunately due to a quirk of their internal organisation, their sit-on lawnmowers fell under their car division, so we ended up with lawnmower racing in the game. No one wanted it, it was a massive, pointless waste of development resources, but we needed to have those Evos and so we did it anyway.

balderz002
08-01-2018, 08:08
I wonder how licenses work with now-defunct race cars. Like the late 90's supertouring cars like, say, a BTCC Laguna? lol

I mean we hear how modern DTM is wrapped up, but how far back would you have to go before you could use a car? early 00's? Like the Audi TT DTM? or into the 90's like the Alfa 155 and Vauxhall Calibra??

Invincible
08-01-2018, 08:20
I wonder how licenses work with now-defunct race cars. Like the late 90's supertouring cars like, say, a BTCC Laguna? lol

I mean we hear how modern DTM is wrapped up, but how far back would you have to go before you could use a car? early 00's? Like the Audi TT DTM? or into the 90's like the Alfa 155 and Vauxhall Calibra??

I can't say for sure, but from what I've heard, especially BTCC is a licensing nightmare. Not because of the costs, but because of who owns the rights of what.

Found a post from Casey:


There is a third complication on BTCC. You have to get the series, then all the manufacturers, but the cars aren't actually built by the factories so you have to also chase each team/chassis builder and occasionally a manufacturer won't approve modifying their cars in game the same way as they are done in the real series (non-standard engine, etc). It's a minefield.

I guess it is the same for 90's DTM. Everything after early 00's DTM should be wrapped up like it is now.

balderz002
08-01-2018, 08:46
I can't say for sure, but from what I've heard, especially BTCC is a licensing nightmare. Not because of the costs, but because of who owns the rights of what.

Its funny because BTCC uses/used the same rules as alot of other TC championships around europe and the world. I mean take the BTCC link out of it (for example, the Pug 406 was useless in BTCC, always a back runner, but in Europe it was pretty damn good with Laurent Aiello winning the 97 STW in one) and would that make it a touch easier? Japan had their own version as well.

I Know what Casey means about the 3rd parties input seeing as TWR ran the Volvo effort, I'm pretty sure I remember Prodrive doing the Mondeo effort in 2000 with the 3 cars.

Angst1974
08-01-2018, 15:26
On a racing game I worked on many years ago, Mitsubishi insisted that if we wanted to use any of their cars we had to include all of that year's production roster. Unfortunately due to a quirk of their internal organisation, their sit-on lawnmowers fell under their car division, so we ended up with lawnmower racing in the game. No one wanted it, it was a massive, pointless waste of development resources, but we needed to have those Evos and so we did it anyway.

OK, now I totally want lawnmowers in PC2 ....

Stewy32
08-01-2018, 18:46
OK, now I totally want lawnmowers in PC2 ....

Ian.We want in a 6th DLC
1 Lawnmower
1 Tractor
1 Combine Harvester
1 Tuck Tuck
1 Cement Mixer
1 Bulldozer
1 Lorry
1 Fork Lifter

And can we use your back garden as the track?

Konan
08-01-2018, 18:48
Ian.We want in a 6th DLC
1 Lawnmower
1 Tractor
1 Combine Harvester
1 Tuck Tuck
1 Cement Mixer
1 Bulldozer
1 Lorry
1 Fork Lifter

And can we use your back garden as the track?

Half of those can be found in "Farming simulator"...LOL

TorTorden
08-01-2018, 18:59
Ian.We want in a 6th DLC
1 Lawnmower
1 Tractor
1 Combine Harvester
1 Tuck Tuck
1 Cement Mixer
1 Bulldozer
1 Lorry
1 Fork Lifter

And can we use your back garden as the track?

You forgot the Zamboni.

Tank621
08-01-2018, 19:01
Half of those can be found in "Farming simulator"...LOL

I bet that's fun with a ffb wheel and VR

xVampirAx
08-01-2018, 19:04
could do with adding the alfa and the opel calibra along side the m3,serria cosworth and the 190e. also there is a 24hrs race with lawnmowers.

Mahjik
08-01-2018, 19:23
As usual, things turn into a request thread.. The question has been answered.