An Open Letter To Paradox

[wthomas]

Sounds like the biggest challenge for Paradox in getting new players to buy a 7-year old game - would be convincing them that the base game, with one or two DLCs is worth checking out without making one big purchase. 75% sales would do it for me.

I think DLCs are a balancing act and there is not exact science. Personally, I think Stellaris is the best model so far, but they should be careful not to bloat it like EU IV (IMHO) and CK2 (to a lesser extent). There is a peak DLC level, where afterwards they may as well stop and create a sequel.

Of course I'm speaking only of quality and "play-ability" of a game - if we consumers keep buying up the DLCs when they release them - why wouldn't they give the public they want? PDS needs to eat.

.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sounds like the biggest challenge for Paradox in getting new players to buy a 7-year old game - would be convincing them that the base game, with one or two DLCs is worth checking out without making one big purchase. 75% sales would do it for me.

I think DLCs are a balancing act and there is not exact science. Personally, I think Stellaris is the best model so far, but they should be careful not to bloat it like EU IV (IMHO) and CK2 (to a lesser extent). There is a peak DLC level, where afterwards they may as well stop and create a sequel.

Of course I'm speaking only of quality and "play-ability" of a game - if we consumers keep buying up the DLCs when they release them - why wouldn't they give the public they want? PDS needs to eat.

.

THis I don't mind DLC at all but lots of low quality/pointless DLC I do.

It also scares of new players or even players who used to play earlier in the games cycle.

 

[Susanna]

That bundle would be $389 in Canadian dollars, btw.

 

[Zardnaar]

That bundle would be $389 in Canadian dollars, btw.

I think I bought Civ III a few years back on steam for $2.50.

I don't think to many people are going to buy a 7 year old game+ expansions for even 75% off that.

 

[I like wars and maps]

EU4 has just gone downhill, the devs are ruining it. Every decision they make feels like they have never played a EU4 campaign beyond the year 1550. Nothing they do has any thought behind it.

 

[fr-rein]

Every decision they make feels like they have never played a EU4 campaign beyond the year 1550.

Wasn't the reason of TC stuttering exactly because they observed AIs and didn't play themselves, thus missing the bug?

 

[Stratagyfan101]

1. Releasing buggy bare boned games. Paradox games have always been a bit of a buggy hot mess but the fans kind of understand. That and 10 years ago social media wasn't such a thing. Paradox was a small indie developer making niche games that were kind of unique. But now it seems that they are holding back features that should have been in the base game IMHO. On release CKII, EUIV, and Stellaris were lacking putting it mildly. Sword of Islam for example should have been in the base game. I would make the same argument for Utopia with Stellaris (which was very bland on release), while EUIV got better fast. Of course it doesn't help that now we have alot of DLC which leads to part 2.

Europa Universalis 4 and Crusader Kings 2 were absolutely solid base games in my opinion. My biggest gripe is where they've taken each game. EU4 has done a splendid job updating the map and adding flavor to new parts of the world, but mechanically it feels stale. They've added a ton of new buttons to press, but not in a few years have I thought something really changed the game like development, colonial nations/trade companies. Things that showed some promise like estates or parliaments have been unfortunately segregated.

With Crusader Kings 2, I stopped playing shortly after the Old Gods was released. With the Islam expansion and then the Old Gods, it felt more like Paradox was trying to wide, shallow game rather than a game that excelled at one thing. When I left, there was no real fun in managing a medieval kingdom. Very little to do as a vassal. Little to no intrigue, minimal ways to interact with characters. An almost unused friend/rival mechanic. The Kingdom laws were not interesting. Being a time based mechanic meant one could not have strong monarchs followed by incompetent monarchs.

 

[Sindai]

Well you probably should have at least paid attention to news about CK2 because the expansions after Old Gods addressed almost everything you wanted.

 

[Duuk]

That bundle would be $389 in Canadian dollars, btw.

How much is it in Quatloons?

 

[Thrake]

There's currently a bundle for CK2 that costs almost 300 euros including the 17% off deal. Without the deal it would be around 350 euros. Can you at least understand how that scares off new players? This isn't about paradox giving stuff away for free, it's about asking a realistic price for a 7 years old game.

But it's not really 7 years old since it's been developped during these 7 years. I guess you could argue about the DLC price, but it's not the same thing then. The DLC could probably decrease in price overtime though... But typical business practice is to have cheap (or even free...) base game to lure customer and get him enough enjoyment to pay good money for DLC. Which kind of makes sense.

The "7 years old" game is not worth 350 euros, it's like 20 euros (base game) maybe?

 

[Imperator Sol Invictus]

Personally, I don't really mind the dlc, if I can get them on sale then hell yeah. Otherwise, for all the money I've sunk into PDX games, I've gotten many more hours out. I'm not advocating for predatory dlc policy, but in the cases of stellaris and eu4 i'd accept more dlc as long as they introduce worthwhile concepts into the game. (screw golden century btw)

 

[Alpha2518]

Personally, I don't really mind the dlc, if I can get them on sale then hell yeah.

Neither do I. But people like you an me at the extreme ends that don't mind this statistically and just wait for the sale making us few in number. Which means PDX should cater to those people that are more in the average where most customers or potential customers will be. This would mean that overtime, they should curb the DLC that is available for sale by folding it into the base game, ideally once they have recovered the investment into said DLC and have made a decent profit, however that is defined by PDX.

Which means, that PDX can keep getting new customers, we keep getting more members added to our community and to play with online, and we can keep getting expansions without the cost of a long list of DLC that has a huge pricet ag at the end of it even with a sale.

 

[averagedan]

I gave up buying Paradox games after being burnt with Stellaris. Such a dull, empty game - in the original base game I was waiting for hours in the mid-game for something to happen, anything at all..... made it a bit too obvious that I was about to be milked for DLC money to turn it into something that was fun and playable. Since then I've been waiting for steam reviews with every Paradox game and they've tended to be overwhelmingly negative, critical of the price point and often moaning that the DLCs were essentially empty vessels.

Bit of a shame really - I've been supporting Paradox since EU I and they seem to have turned into another company just trying to milk their customers, a la Blizzard or EA. Only reason I hang around now is to play some EUIV and CK2 mods.

 

[Jernau_]

I think I bought Civ III a few years back on steam for $2.50.

I don't think to many people are going to buy a 7 year old game+ expansions for even 75% off that.

If you want to compare them you should include Civ 3+ civ 4 + civ5 + civ 6 along with all expansion packs and other dlcs.

Paradox games are pretty cheap for the amount of fun i get out of them, and i really enjoy the continued development through dlc's even if i dont necessarily buy all of them.

 

[GarfunkeL]

I gave up buying Paradox games after being burnt with Stellaris. Such a dull, empty game - in the original base game I was waiting for hours in the mid-game for something to happen, anything at all..... made it a bit too obvious that I was about to be milked for DLC money to turn it into something that was fun and playable. Since then I've been waiting for steam reviews with every Paradox game and they've tended to be overwhelmingly negative, critical of the price point and often moaning that the DLCs were essentially empty vessels.

Bit of a shame really - I've been supporting Paradox since EU I and they seem to have turned into another company just trying to milk their customers, a la Blizzard or EA.
Only reason I hang around now is to play some EUIV and CK2 mods.

They already started that with HoI4, by cutting away existing features from HoI3, and now they are introducing them via DLC back into the game, and releasing a broken mess as a base game. I've been playing Pdox games since EU2 and yeah, the company has certainly gone downhill. There still exists major bugs in HoI3 that are hardcoded in the .exe file (ground defence value for airplanes does nothing for example) and thus cannot be fixed by modding so we have to be aware of them to avoid them instead. And reading that they're doing the same but on a bigger scale with their later products is disheartening.

 

[Stratagyfan101]

They already started that with HoI4, by cutting away existing features from HoI3, and now they are introducing them via DLC back into the game, and releasing a broken mess as a base game. I've been playing Pdox games since EU2 and yeah, the company has certainly gone downhill. There still exists major bugs in HoI3 that are hardcoded in the .exe file (ground defence value for airplanes does nothing for example) and thus cannot be fixed by modding so we have to be aware of them to avoid them instead. And reading that they're doing the same but on a bigger scale with their later products is disheartening.

I think that HOI III was a turning point for PDS. HOI III's release was notoriously terrible, even by PDS standards. It was arguably one of their most ambitious products and upon release fell flat.

 

[JCivX]

I put more hours into but in hindsight I thought it was bland on release.

What a surprise. You were happy with the game at first and kept playing but once you got used to the DLC content, now all of a sudden you wanted the DLCs included in the base game too but did not want to pay for it.

This happens all the time. The players are happy playing the game (like the majority of people were during the launch of EU4, for example) but then new cool stuff and features come out and people think "I want that too" but don't want to pay for the extra game development, so they get pissy because of course the devs should have included all of the extra stuff to the base game too.

For sure there are some things that Paradox has got wrong over the years, but their titles match up very well in terms of "being fully fleshed out" against past games and against current competition.

 

[averagedan]

If you're claiming that Stellaris was "fully fleshed out" I have no idea which planet you're on. Even HoI4 was a bit bare bones in that respect. Both noticeably thinner than CK2 and EUIV and were released far before the other two. This just supports the idea that, unlike a few years ago, Paradox are actively planning to milk people for DLC.

 

[Malecord]

I agree for the most with the OP.

What I personally disagree on is that I'm not to much troubled about the amount of DLCs. I understand that great strategy games take lot of incremental iterations to reach their full potential and DLCs business model is the natural choice here to finance them. So it's fine for me if a game arrives to get 16 DLCs over time as long as it is a great game. Same deal with the game changing. But I do have an issue with the pricing for old DLCs. It is a serious problem when it comes to bring new players in the game. Even with discounts. And it prevents your own customers from investing on more than 1 or maximum 2 of your IPs. It seems to me that you're asking more money that what is actually around which means that the competitors of your games are your other own games.

But I think the OP addressed what is really the elephant in the room: DLCs are being pushed out constantly before they are ready. Which prevents games from ever reach a stable state as tech debt, bugs and poor UI/AI issues accumulates over time. This is especially dramatic for new games. Whilst for older games often the issue is to have DLCs with poor content. Which often is only bought because the patch changes the overall game balance so that if you don't own the DLC you play with some degree of an handicap.

Now the reason why this happens is obvious: PDX is a public company, public companies are "doomed" to generate larger revenues every year and DLCs generate revenues but post sale bugfixes and qol fixes do not. So it's customers vs shareholders interests trade off. Clearly when the balance shifts to much toward shareholders and for to long, a company start to lose its customers affection/loyalty. And you have the EA/Activision/Bethesda syndrome.
Now since Pdx is in no way aiming at mobile/teenagers/gambling or some extreme monetization practices I don't really dare to put it in the decadent AAA publisher club. But in my opinion if some sensible degree of product quality is not restored in your games soon (which basically means to relax the release schedule to meet the new standards) you will eventually lose your hardcore fanboy base. At that point you will become similar to the decadent ones in the sense that having Paradox sticker below a game title will instill suspicion rather than trust on public places like Reddit and such.

 

[Aotrs Commander]

But I think the OP addressed what is really the elephant in the room: DLCs are being pushed out constantly before they are ready. Which prevents games from ever reach a stable state as tech debt, bugs and poor UI/AI issues accumulates over time. This is especially dramatic for new games. Whilst for older games often the issue is to have DLCs with poor content. Which often is only bought because the patch changes the overall game balance so that if you don't own the DLC you play with some degree of an handicap.

And yet, when both Stellaris and EUIV specifically say "no new content for a good bit, we're fixing bugs" they get flack for not making new content. Often while simultaneously being berated for having bugs.

You literally cannot win.