- 5
- 1
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Sure, anonymous internet guy terrified of giving any proof, I trust you to tell the truth.
- 9
I don't need to prove you anything. You can continue to live in your paranoid word for all I care.
not around dense people
Thank you for further proving my point.
- 8
- 2
I didn't know the execs are the ones designing Paradox DLC's. Nice, learn something new every day.
- 9
And you can live in fantasy-land for all I care.
Execs order dlc spam, do you know anything about corporate structure?
Execs order dlc spam, do you know anything about corporate structure?
- 14
- 1
Pray tell, how have the execs spammed CK2 or EUIV with unnecessary DLC?
- 8
http://www.eu4wiki.com/Downloadable_content
Scroll down. The game is only two years old.
Especially the music and cosmetic microtransactions
Scroll down. The game is only two years old.
Especially the music and cosmetic microtransactions
- 18
- 1
Well, having never played any HOI game yet keen on getting my hands on this one; a DLC where all nations are correctly represented with equal amounts of flavor.
- 2
I really hate to break into the bickering going on here, but...
The beauty of DLCs is that you can pick exactly what you want, and disregard the rest. Compare this with x-packs of old, where you had to buy the whole pack and all of its contents. Now you can buy exactly the content you want, and no one is forcing you to spend any money on the things you don't want. Pretty much the only DLC I own for CK2 is the Old Gods, and I'm having lots of fun with the game all the same.
If I go to Spotify to buy a song, I don't get mad because the service also offers the rest of the content that artist has made. If I go to a fast-food place to buy a burger, I don't yell at the employees for also offering sodas and fries.
I honestly do not understand the anger towards the DLC policy going on here. If you don't like them, don't buy them, it's as simple as that. We're not brainless consumer robots, we're adults capable of making conscious, rational decisions.
The beauty of DLCs is that you can pick exactly what you want, and disregard the rest. Compare this with x-packs of old, where you had to buy the whole pack and all of its contents. Now you can buy exactly the content you want, and no one is forcing you to spend any money on the things you don't want. Pretty much the only DLC I own for CK2 is the Old Gods, and I'm having lots of fun with the game all the same.
If I go to Spotify to buy a song, I don't get mad because the service also offers the rest of the content that artist has made. If I go to a fast-food place to buy a burger, I don't yell at the employees for also offering sodas and fries.
I honestly do not understand the anger towards the DLC policy going on here. If you don't like them, don't buy them, it's as simple as that. We're not brainless consumer robots, we're adults capable of making conscious, rational decisions.
Define "unneccessary". I've downloaded music DLCs myself and greatly enjoyed them.
Last edited:
- 24
- 1
Execs and dev teams arrive at a consensus about DLC policies. If the power is balanced in the corporation, the consensus is balanced as well.
- 6
- 1
If i decide to buy the game i will play it vanilla for a long time.
I rather spend my money on multiple games rather than one game + dozens of dlc.
But they can put out all the dlc they want, as long as they don't fiddle around with the core game to accommodate for dlc.
I rather spend my money on multiple games rather than one game + dozens of dlc.
But they can put out all the dlc they want, as long as they don't fiddle around with the core game to accommodate for dlc.
- 6
Considering the DLC allows for them to continue work on games for an additional few years and with the release of DLC they add additional free content for the vanilla game I think you're safe.
- 8
People nowadays are just overly sensitive in regards to DLC, thanks to EA-style DLC's where you, at worst, can take out an important part of a game and sell it as a day-one DLC. Kinda like if Sword of Islam would have been a day-one DLC for CK2.
- 5
- 1
- Dec 14, 1999
- 22.075
- 263.468
My official title is Executive VP of Creative Direction these days.. And i design 80-90% of the eu4 dlc, and are imvolved in design decisions in all our games. I also decide and approve what our games and expansions should contain.
- 34
For me EUIV is now hugely better because of all the major DLC. I find it more involved, more fun, immersive, and better decision making, and a hugely better game at showing me information.
I am hugely looking forward to HoI4. But am also aware that HoI4 release should only get massively better with major DLCs and patches- and that adds more anticipation.
One thing I would want is more content per £/$/E. Some of the EUIV expansions while good, and improving, have been light on content-cost ratio for me. But they all add huge gaming value to game so have them all.
There's going to be a tension between company and customers of how much content is worth X. And I guess we are all on a scale (I think economics calls this price elasticity). But, personally I'd say at least a little more content to hit a sweeter spot.
I am hugely looking forward to HoI4. But am also aware that HoI4 release should only get massively better with major DLCs and patches- and that adds more anticipation.
One thing I would want is more content per £/$/E. Some of the EUIV expansions while good, and improving, have been light on content-cost ratio for me. But they all add huge gaming value to game so have them all.
There's going to be a tension between company and customers of how much content is worth X. And I guess we are all on a scale (I think economics calls this price elasticity). But, personally I'd say at least a little more content to hit a sweeter spot.
- 13
doesn't really apply to pardox as they are a private company, but i'm sure you already realized that by your knowledge of how business works
- 9
- 1
What I'm seeing with EU4 is an emerging strategy to force players to buy DLCs by making patches that require the latest DLC to function fully.
This informs me that I shouldn't buy the product until the 'collections' edition is out.
Preferably there should be one, at most two, DLCs a year. And they really, really, should be optional.
This informs me that I shouldn't buy the product until the 'collections' edition is out.
Preferably there should be one, at most two, DLCs a year. And they really, really, should be optional.
- 14
- 4
@Johan, can Paradox do for HoI4 the nice thing one of the users suggested for EU .I think it was for EU, can't remember his name or find the topic, but it went something like this:
After some time (let's say two years) the DLC is merged with vanilla game, giving two important benefits:
1. After few years after release it is not required to spend 100 EUR to get full game experience.
2. It allows you, devs, to improve or build upon mechanics implemented in the DLC without the need to release said mechanic in yet another DLC. (like in last CK devdiary Doomdark wishes that Retinues were part of the main game or like you actually had to put National focuses in two EU DLCs so government ranks would work as designed). Also the problem of balancing new changes with superset of DLCs is reduced.
That of course relates only to gameplay DLCs, not cosmetic ones like unit or music packs.
The most important argument against it was iirc that why should some people get for free stuff that other have to pay for, but I think that would no longer be the case if you state when DLC is released that after two years it would be merged with core game. People will know what they are paying for and would have a choice (pay and play for two years, or don't pay and wait two years).
After some time (let's say two years) the DLC is merged with vanilla game, giving two important benefits:
1. After few years after release it is not required to spend 100 EUR to get full game experience.
2. It allows you, devs, to improve or build upon mechanics implemented in the DLC without the need to release said mechanic in yet another DLC. (like in last CK devdiary Doomdark wishes that Retinues were part of the main game or like you actually had to put National focuses in two EU DLCs so government ranks would work as designed). Also the problem of balancing new changes with superset of DLCs is reduced.
That of course relates only to gameplay DLCs, not cosmetic ones like unit or music packs.
The most important argument against it was iirc that why should some people get for free stuff that other have to pay for, but I think that would no longer be the case if you state when DLC is released that after two years it would be merged with core game. People will know what they are paying for and would have a choice (pay and play for two years, or don't pay and wait two years).
- 4
I use the terms semi-interchangeably because I'm not a prescriptivist pedant.
- 12
- 1