Google+

EA takes the concept of free-to-play and bludgeons its skull into paste with a $100 DLC car

Shares

  There's absolutely nothing wrong with the freemium video game revenue model, provided the system is fair and balanced in its execution. But if I'm going to spend an amount as large as $100 on anything in this world, then there are a few things that I like said purchase to do for me. Like actually exist.

EA though, currently has no care for my infantile fancies. EA, you see, knows that it's perfectly acceptable to demand exactly that much real-world money for a digital simulation of a single car in a technically free-to-play racing game. EA is also very probably fully aware that the world is secretly ruled by the Hunchback of Notre Dame from a secret base hidden deep within a network of subterranean jam volcanoes, and that vol-au-vents will sing you the future if you press them to your ears hard enough. 

This particular piece of automotive insanity relates to Need For Speed World, EA's PC-exclusive, free-to-play online racer. The car in question is the Koenigsegg CCX Elite Edition, the first bit of "premium elite" DLC for the game. But hey, it's currently discounted to $75, so that's good. Though I do of course use the word "discounted" in the same way that one would describe a horse turd lightly sprinkled with vanilla seeds as "fragrant". 

If you want it at this bargain price, you'd better grab it quick from the in-game shop. The price goes up to the full hundred after the 21st of December, and it really would make the perfect stocking filler for Christmas.

Well it would were it not for the facts that a) it's still horrifically bloody expensive, and b) it won't fill a stocking because it doesn't actually bloody exist. But either way, full points for trying, EA.

We Recommend

28 comments

  • StonedMagician99 - December 15, 2011 6:35 p.m.

    To be fair, it's $60, not $100. Still horribly overpriced, but just pointing that out.
  • jmcgrotty - December 16, 2011 8:55 a.m.

    To be more fair, it isn't that straightforward either way. It all depends on how you buy the Speedbosts. Buy more and you get a % bonus/premium. If you bought them at the cheapest price, 1900 for $7, it would be around $105. Prorated down, about $92 in cost. Or buy them in group of 10,000 for $25.00. Final cost would be, if you ONLY bought with that rate: $75 (Need to buy 30,000 to get the 25,000 needed). Prorated down, about $64. Buy in group of 22,000 for $50. Final cost (again, if you ONLY bought with this rate): $100 (need to buy 44,000 to get the 25,000 needed). Prorated down, about $55. Buy in group of 62,500 for $110. Final cost: $110. Prorated down, about $45. Obviously, you would be stupid to not take advantage of the best price, but the price range you might ultimately pay is very wide.
  • ThatGamerDude - December 15, 2011 3:54 p.m.

    Given a possibility it meant to be $1 but some greedy person in the marketing division set to $100 without anyone looking. Its madness I tell you!
  • KnowBuddy - December 15, 2011 2:56 p.m.

    Excellent use of Scrooge McDuck.
  • Jasman - December 15, 2011 2:27 p.m.

    This is EA's way of testing how idiot-proof the freemium model is. If two people buy the car, then they'll reconsider their plans. If 10 people buy the car, then they'll pose whether to offer more. If 100 people buy the car, then EA will stretch the model beyond the confines of acceptable logic and ruin the entire thing within a year.
  • linorn - December 15, 2011 2:03 p.m.

    Publicity stunt is obvious.
  • LEGOMatrix - December 15, 2011 12:27 p.m.

    Really who cares if they offer this ridiculously overpriced car? It's not going to be so much better than the others that it is unbeatable, and it is clear that someone would have to have lots of money, very little sense and a deep love of Koenigsegg to even consider purchasing it at the discounted price. Those people deserve and can afford to lose 100 dollars. If they sell one, EA is laughing, and I'm sure they'll sell more than one because there are a lot of idiots in the world.
  • Wimjet - December 15, 2011 12:13 p.m.

    Does EA get their spreadsheets from the year 2027 when the dollar has inflated to $100? If not, then someone needs to smack someone over at EA to value things at a reasonable rate in this economy.
  • larkan - December 15, 2011 11:05 a.m.

    That game was horrible at launch when I paid $40 for it, only to have it go F2P shortly thereafter. This is why I don't buy games unless I play them first anymore, whether it be a demo or friend.
  • SketchLemon - December 15, 2011 11:01 a.m.

    do they come in purple? no? i'll take twelve.
  • SGTCOOL - December 15, 2011 10:03 a.m.

    You know that at least one extremely insecure and lonely person will buy this to add to their non-existent online ego. So sorry if that one person is browsing these comments. All the best.
  • ThatGuyFromTV - December 15, 2011 9:44 a.m.

    I still say that the people behind EVE are worse for asking for this kind of money for a monocle that, in reality, nobody will ever see. It's a game about ships, for chrissakes, who cares about a monocle?! This is still pretty up there, though.
  • FoxdenRacing - December 15, 2011 10:22 a.m.

    At least to my knowledge, the monocle doesn't do anything. This is a car in a racing game...a high-cost unfair advantage, the cardinal sin of fee-to-pay gaming.
  • Darkhawk - December 15, 2011 9:23 a.m.

    This model exists for one reason, and one reason alone: kids with their parents' credit cards. That's why iOS gets away with it (where the CC info is saved on the system already), and that's why online gaming gets away with it when stupid kids get their grubby hands on mommy and daddy's numbers.
  • Bugsy - December 15, 2011 10:13 a.m.

    That's sadly true, they rely on children who don't really know what they're doing... and some asshole kids that do!
  • Longnuts - December 15, 2011 9:10 a.m.

    $75 is 3 nights of a booze bender. No thanks. Plus I hate racing games anyways.
  • Moondoggie1157 - December 15, 2011 8:59 a.m.

    I am at a loss, leave it to EA to pull a move like this. Decency: "But it's a virtual car, how can you ask $100?" EA: "Because, FUCK YOU, that's why. Now touch your toes..." The Beginning of the end, my friends. We saw it here first.
  • VoideeX7 - December 15, 2011 8:53 a.m.

    100$ for a virtual ONE THING is just crazy, come on! who ever buy this? seriously needs to GIFT ME a million dollars, cause there is no excuse, one thing is to charge a ridiculous high price for DLC like 10 or more $, for very few things, and now they charging 100? i bet COD will get one and i will see alot of fans buying them, this wrong, we need to change this, speak with our wallets, dont buy it, let them die it out, doesnt care how pretty the car is, unless it brings some kind of real world thing, like, let me borrow the actual car for a day with full insurance, or something worth 100$ of physical thing.
  • Moondoggie1157 - December 15, 2011 9:01 a.m.

    I think I agree with you, but I kinda got a headache from trying to decipher your post...
  • GarcianSmith - December 15, 2011 8:42 a.m.

    Why in the name of all that is right in the world, would anyone actually buy this?

Showing 1-20 of 28 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.