Why do companies feel the need to put unnecessary amounts of lug's on cars? There is literally no need for a Nissan Sentra or cars around the same size or smaller to have 5 lugs. They barely have the power to pull themselves along let alone break off lugs.
Huh. Can’t imagine Chrysler was okay with that. EDIT, my bad, looking at the wiki it claims it was under license. Who’da thunk.
Oh look, now Mitsubishi's being a licensing troll. Honestly, at this point I'm starting to suspect it's some kind of messed-up Japanese honor/shame thing RE: modified cars & street racing. Of course neither they nor Toyota want to say what's actually going on, so it may or may not be some kind of money-grubbing suitbot reason that would make everyone hate them forever if they said it out loud. Some have suspected financial troubles, which makes no sense with Toyota, but doesn't seem to far out of the question with Mitsubishi, at least from my NA-market perspective. Anyone want to bet on how long it'll be before the entire gaming industry has to take the "badges taped over" approach the way Genki Racing Project did in the late 1990s and early 2000s? At this point all I can think of to say is, get everyone you know together, and let's flood them with angry letters. Say that after this we wouldn't even buy a used one of their cars let alone a new one, and if circumstances forced us to we'd remove or cover the badges to avoid giving them any public exposure. We don't have the numbers we'd need to really punish them for this, but maybe there are at least enough to force an explanation, if we could imply that there are a lot more angry people out there who didn't send letters.
Mitsubishi is trying to make people forget that they made great cars at one point, so that they can get away with selling CVT crossovers with sporty names. Read a review of the new eclipse cross, and apparently it is complete garbage.
Too primitive to keep up with import brands, too expensive and complex to keep up with domestic vehicles. That's how it failed.
See, Mitsubishi is partially owned by Nissan. While I'm not saying that's their whole problem, it's definitely easy to see Nissan meddling with the brand. Over styled, CVTs galore, uninspired driving, horrible visibility, it reeks of Nissan. Nissan should have been Ford-like. When Ford had stake in Mazda (and I think they still do), they borrowed platforms and engines to help make their cars better. Nissan should have borrowed Mitsubishi turbo technology (the same technology that made the Veyron make 1,000HP and made the Evo put down almost 400HP), but instead turned Mitsu into a shell of its former self.
Maybe if I was a gamedev, I'd think otherwise, but currently, my amount of care for there being no cars from this or that company with the variety games like Forza offer anyway is well-represented by the number of cars in this parking lot:
It's actually going to be called "Road Rover" as the brand, instead of simply "Rover" like you expect. ...and yes, it's Range Rover behind it.
It should be noted, Mitsubishi turbochargers are not made by Mitsubishi the car company, and Mitsubishi car's often used non Mitsubishi turbos. The TD0x like aren't exactly high tech turbos. Veyron uses borg Warner turbochargers under the masterpower name, not Mitsubishi
Further useless sitrep on the game licensing situation: Some other people are now saying that the current licensing idiocy is because Japanese car companies hate, and hate being associated with, street racing culture, and they only want people to see their cars in stock form, on a track. I'd mentioned this possibility before, but now am starting to doubt it myself, since these manufacturers, with the partial, occasional exception of Honda, were perfectly OK with it for years on end but now suddenly two are dropping out at the same time. Toyota even made a special tofu delivery edition of the GT86 to celebrate its UK launch. Apparently Toyota has said something along the lines of "people won't want to buy our cars IRL if they can drive them in video games", or something about street racing culture maybe, not sure about any of that as I haven't looked it up and am honestly too lazy right now. Mitsubishi is still tight-lipped. Also, a little background on why this makes me so angry: I have, for some time, had an idea of a racing game kicking around in my head and am currently trying to figure out how to pursue that idea. And now I'm watching that idea get destroyed before it even gets started by corporate image-wranglers indifferent to "the rest of us". Toyota have apparently blamed video games for their old cars being in higher demand than their new ones. Well Toyota, maybe that wouldn't be a problem if your newer models weren't all trash and too boring to attract a developer's attention! You discontinued the Supra in 1998 for the US market, a few years later elsewhere, got rid of the Celica after 2005, the (by then severely stunted) MR2 around the same time, the Corolla XRS after like 2008 or something, detuned and bloated the Matrix XRS at roughly the same time, Scion tC in... I don't even remember when, because it was pretty mediocre for its entire run and pretty ugly at the end of it, spent a good 7-8 years chasing the environmental virtue signalers, the hippy-dippy active lifestyle types, and the actively car-indifferent to the exclusion of almost anyone else, finally introduced one sporty model whose appeal is severely limited by its inability to outrun a minivan, and are now bringing out a new "Supra" which has no manual transmission, oh and somewhere in there you completely stopped making any superchargers for your cars, when you used to have one for almost every model in your entire lineup. You deserve this, Toyota. You brought this on yourselves. Deliberately. Don't go ruining our games to try to salvage this situation. Yes, the Celica at least was canceled for lack of sales, but that doesn't mean that you had to go out of your way to be as beige as freaking possible. (To Akio Toyoda specifically - you have, on previous occasions, sent minions to analyze competitor cars and find out why they're more fun to drive than your own. The fact that the Prius finally sort of feels like a car is proof that they collected valuable data. Maybe try a little harder to apply that data across your lineup and you won't have a problem with your historical legacy holding you back. Sincerely, the guy who doesn't want to have to come up with fake names & logos for your company and products a few years from now.)
[QUOTE="Shotgun Chuck, post: 924348, member: 99288" Also, a little background on why this makes me so angry: I have, for some time, had an idea of a racing game kicking around in my head and am currently trying to figure out how to pursue that idea. And now I'm watching that idea get destroyed before it even gets started by corporate image-wranglers indifferent to "the rest of us"[/QUOTE] Well, if it ever gets started. If.
Yeah, well, still annoying. Also to make things even more confusing, I've also heard someone say that Toyota's US subsidiary is the one causing all the problems and they have a tendency to be really annoying about licensing anyway... though that still doesn't explain Mitsubishi. Given that they killed the Evo, then stuck the Lancer and Eclipse badges on crossovers, they may have just lost their collective minds. I do think that the "memory hole" theory is the one that holds the most water so far, especially as Toyota apparently all but confirmed it on social media at one point, but frankly, that's all Toyota's (and now Mitsubishi's) fault anyway. If their current lineups weren't utter trash, maybe people wouldn't be so hung up on cars they don't make anymore? You know, I was thinking I'd never make a Twitter account because of their anti-conservative censorship, but if it's possible to hide your real name on that site, then I might seriously consider making an account just to spam Toyota and Mitsubishi over this and basically tell them that all their problems are their own fault because, even discounting all the sporty models they used to make back when racing meant more to them than a way to develop hypebrid technology or replace Chevrolet in the American popular consciousness, they went way off the rails and don't seem interested in getting back on anytime soon. A well-cared-for 1998 Camry is probably a lot more fun to drive than a 2018 Camry, simply because it doesn't weigh as much as a small house or have 5 million computers second-guessing your every move.
On the other hand, Toyota's primary output is not meant to be sporty. In fact, a too sporty reputation may scare some nuyers away.
The reality is, that if you were building a game independently, you wouldn't be able to afford licencing fees anyway. You might be able to find a way to negotiate something with some of the really small enthusiast companies if your game looks genuinely good and you are able to form a good rapport with them, but you likely wouldn't even be allowed to the table for most places. Just look at how Project Cars had to handle it, they had to build the entire game with un-badged cars, and then slowly start adding the badges in as people bought the game so that they could afford them. This is from a studio that is big enough to build AAA games (NFS Shift was theirs), with approx 160 people working there on payroll.
What kinda ticks me off about Toyota and other companies similar to it is that they’re taking cars like their flagship sedan, the Avalon (in the US market at least) and trying to transform it from a nice, practical, and comfortable daily to some stiff-suspensioned “sports car”.
Saw this in the news today, gave me a good chuckle I guess, honestly, I'd be tempted to take the Volvo over the Jag https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-45481438
From a practical outlook, fictional cars are better - they have no licensing cost and grant bigger artistic freedom.
