Will Paradox consider streamlining their DLC business model for future games?

[LumberKing]

This is not about people who are certain to buy all the DLCs or even regular fans of paradox that follow the news, read the DDs and so on. They will buy DLCs no matter what, a season pass (don't do subscriptions for a mainly solo game, ever, it's a terrible idea), might enable you to squeeze a bit more from this target audience, but it's not really relevant IMO.

It's about the new customers that hear about the games two year laters (or old customers that returns to the game after two years)

And they see this :

<pic>

This would put off anyone from buying any game. The DLC list is larger than the game description ...


This is just telling people "you're not actually buying the full game for 40€, the full game will actually cost you 145€"

Also even though there are sales quite often, the price tag of the game or its older DLCs never changed.

Except DLCs are expansion packs which further more expands a full game. I don't see how a game having a huge DLC list make someone put off since those aren't necessary to enjoy the original game. Same goes for simulators unlike first-person shooter map packs or shiny new guns, simulating different models is a lot of work and usually warranted an entirely new game.

 

[Shams]

This is not about people who are certain to buy all the DLCs or even regular fans of paradox that follow the news, read the DDs and so on. They will buy DLCs no matter what, a season pass (don't do subscriptions for a mainly solo game, ever, it's a terrible idea), might enable you to squeeze a bit more from this target audience, but it's not really relevant IMO.

It's about the new customers that hear about the games two year laters (or old customers that returns to the game after two years)

And they see this :

This would put off anyone from buying any game. The DLC list is larger than the game description ...


This is just telling people "you're not actually buying the full game for 40€, the full game will actually cost you 145€"

Also even though there are sales quite often, the price tag of the game or its older DLCs never changed.

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

 

[Phibs]

As a newcomer, yeah that'd put me off.

Dlc that has been on sale a couple of times (usually coinciding the release of new dlc) could have the standard price permanently lowered in a bundle on steam.
Dlc-cycle/tier/season-bundles.
Just a suggestion. *shrug*

 

[Darkath]

See this thread

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?830650-The-Train-Simulator-sindrome/page6

Ultimately it might be a presentation issue of steam, but it doesn't change the fact that people feel they have to buy dozens of DLCs to get the complete game for a grand total of 145€ outside sales. And that's a game that is 2,5 year old.

 

[dur]

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

I certainly think presentation is the main issue. Maybe you could bundle all of the CK2 and EU4 into little "collections" like you guys offered for AoW. That way new players could still purchase each expansion separately, but get all of the song and model packs (or portraits for CK2) along with each expansion. The newest expansion and its flavor DLC would remain unbundled.

As a newcomer, yeah that'd put me off.

Dlc that has been on sale a couple of times (usually coinciding the release of new dlc) could have the standard price permanently lowered in a bundle on steam.
Dlc-cycle/tier/season-bundles.
Just a suggestion. *shrug*

Basically this.

 

[Jaol]

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

The main problem is on Steam's end. What I'd really like is a way to tick a bunch of DLC in that screen that shows which ones I already have, and add them all to my cart at once. But that doesn't seem to be possible.

 

[dur]

The main problem is on Steam's end. What I'd really like is a way to tick a bunch of DLC in that screen that shows which ones I already have, and add them all to my cart at once. But that doesn't seem to be possible.

Until Valve gets their act together, this extension exists to help you out: http://www.enhancedsteam.com/

 

[FOARP]

Season passes sound like a great idea.

Would people prefer a subscription. Just sign up and don't be bothered with the hassle of having to manually buy each DLC - for those that know they'll be getting every single one? subscribing might give you a discount or other special bonus?

/shams

Paying for all the DLC even if I don't want/use them?

 

[vaca_loca]

A season pass would generate grief if a DLC got delayed, or if some time period ends up with more releases than another one. It might work for games that only get DLC for a year after release, but PI games are supported much longer than that.

A subscription model for automatic DLCs or big discounts might be worth experimenting, but it would be difficult to get the cost right. There are many customer profiles. Some like cosmetics, some don't. Some buy a few DLCs from each game, some buy all the DLCs for one game. Another detail is that a subscription in dollars wouldn't be worth it for regions where Steam charges lower prices in the local currency.

I find the current system works ok, and bundles are good, after a while you should just bundle the small stuff and stop selling the separate DLCs, to reduce clutter. Steam is bad, but you have to work around it.

 

[klopkr]

What happens when we reach the end of the sixths cycle? hmy:

I'm sorry but I don't get your probably sick reference.

 

[Had a dad]

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

I know for me, groupings would be great. Say "Expansion DLCs", "Graphic DLCs", and "Music DLCs"

 

[Phibs]

I'm sorry but I don't get your probably sick reference.

Mayan doom nonsense mixed with shadowrun.

It makes sense in my head, I swear .


Also: sixth, not 'sixths' Phibs!!!

 

[Zylathas]

I think it would be nice if you could subscribe yourself to PDS. Pay 5-10 euro's a month and get all dlc's (and games?) for free. I would certainly be up for some sort of system like that, many mmo's used it in the past and because paradox games have a very mmo-like development it would certainly fit the game well.

 

[FOARP]

I think it would be nice if you could subscribe yourself to PDS. Pay 5-10 euro's a month and get all dlc's (and games?) for free. I would certainly be up for some sort of system like that, many mmo's used it in the past and because paradox games have a very mmo-like development it would certainly fit the game well.

I've always been against subscribing to anything if I can help it. A subscription means that any period during which you don't use the service is wasted, and I don't want to feel an obligation to play like that.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

It can look intimidating for a new player and some of the DLC names could give the impression of horse armor DLC; I at least know some people at my university who were at first thrown off the game because of that and only got it after heavy advertising by me---and reasurance that all those DLC weren't needed. On the other hand I like how you are given the choise whether or not you want additional graphics, additional songs (why haven't you made any of those recently?) or just the expansion; although I buy everything not everybody will do it.

A subscription model for automatic DLCs or big discounts might be worth experimenting, but it would be difficult to get the cost right. There are many customer profiles. Some like cosmetics, some don't. Some buy a few DLCs from each game, some buy all the DLCs for one game. Another detail is that a subscription in dollars wouldn't be worth it for regions where Steam charges lower prices in the local currency.

I would actually like a subscription in dollars---or just any price in dollars; that makes the games much cheaper.

I know for me, groupings would be great. Say "Expansion DLCs", "Graphic DLCs", and "Music DLCs"

That could be a solution after a while, but especially with expansions I think it would be a bad idea. Music and graphics grouped after a while could be a good idea, though without a discount those groups will be expensive and people might not buy them for it. 2€ for a music of graphics DLC is nothing (it is the price of a discounted bag of chips after all), whereas a graphics/music group at 30€ is more likely to make you not buy it as a new user.

I've always been against subscribing to anything if I can help it. A subscription means that any period during which you don't use the service is wasted, and I don't want to feel an obligation to play like that.

It wouldn't be that you cannot use the game unless you pay though; it would be that you get all DLC/expansions released in the period you subscribe; if you stop subscribing you keep what you have, but don't automatically get new stuff.

 

[FOARP]

It wouldn't be that you cannot use the game unless you pay though; it would be that you get all DLC/expansions released in the period you subscribe; if you stop subscribing you keep what you have, but don't automatically get new stuff.

In which case the pressure would be on Paradox to release even if the product isn't finished. Personally I wish they'd just de-clutter the DLCs a bit through bundling (and maybe dropping some of the more pointless stuff - non-DLC DLCs like the e-books for example), and stop advertising them in-game.

 

[Wagonlitz]

In which case the pressure would be on Paradox to release even if the product isn't finished. Personally I wish they'd just de-clutter the DLCs a bit through bundling (and maybe dropping some of the more pointless stuff - non-DLC DLCs like the e-books for example), and stop advertising them in-game.

You have a point that even subscriptions can end up pressure the devs.

 

[AndPimentel]

Personally I wish they'd just de-clutter the DLCs a bit through bundling (and maybe dropping some of the more pointless stuff - non-DLC DLCs like the e-books for example), and stop advertising them in-game.

This.

 

[I_AM_King_Midas]

Do people feel this is a problem that we need to fix - or Steam? I mean sure we can go about creating smart ways of presenting dozens of DLC - but ultimately it's a presentation issue on Steams end.

/shams

As a new comer this would definitely be a turn off. I have had friends who were going to get into the game think twice because of this.

 

[I_AM_King_Midas]

I think it would be nice if you could subscribe yourself to PDS. Pay 5-10 euro's a month and get all dlc's (and games?) for free. I would certainly be up for some sort of system like that, many mmo's used it in the past and because paradox games have a very mmo-like development it would certainly fit the game well.

I would pay 10$ a month for all DLC and games for sure.