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

[Phibs]

Paradox is sort of a special animal due to the longevity of its games (via patches and dlc), the amount of dlc & the heavy impact the dlc has on gameplay.

Only sort-of comparison I can think of is Civ5.

Personally I would not recommend CK2 without the gamplay-dlc.

So if, as a newcomer, I'm told hey check out Civ5 complete - that sets me back 50 dollares as of now, for CK2 235 $ (128 $ for the essentials).

I'd have a hard time making that pitch to a friend, due to the size of the necessary investment.
The usual recommendations I give & receive run no higher than forty quid.

Best case scenario, if I maliciously wanted to infect a friend with the pdox virus:

'Hey check out this game, new dlc just hit, everything up to dlc x is on sale, there's a button for the reduced price gamplay dlc and combined with the base game you'll have to put down 50(?) bucks'.

 

[Wagonlitz]

While I agree the lists on Steam really need to be sorted or separated better, it always confuses me when people say lots of DLC is a turn off. "Oh hey, I heard this game is good, I sure hope there's little or no additional content for it! I really hate being able to get more of a game I enjoy!". If I enjoy a game I want more of it, and it's normally pretty easy to check if its DLCs are more content or just horse armour.

The "I told my friend to try this game but the number of DLCs made them avoid it" story is also really strange to me, as it implies the teller has friends who happily accept their game recommendations normally but at the same time refuse to believe their explanation that the base game is fun without it and the DLC is just optional fun extra content. It's such an oddly specific level of trust.

I think it is mainly the overall price which scares people off. People see the price tag for the game and DLC at ~200€ and are scared away even if they think they might like it. People simply might not know that the base game is perfectly playable and that it still gets patches---or that when you play MP you have the DLC of the host. So I simply think new people believe you are like the bad boys, when you probably have the best DLC policy. So you should keep doing DLCs the way you do, but you also need to do something with presentation; it simply has a psycological effect when you see the total price of a game being ~200€.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

We haven't noticed any customer behaviour thats different when we have loads of dlc for 200$ compared to hardly any dlc. Having lots of dlc with a high total $ seems to have absolutely no impact on how people purchase.

People wanting to "try" something out buys bundles that already have large discounts, and then are a further 50-75% off during sales. Having more dlc then just increases the amount of people buying it.

The only thing that sucks is that you can't really group DLC in a meaningful way.

 

[Zylathas]

We haven't noticed any customer behaviour thats different when we have loads of dlc for 200$ compared to hardly any dlc. Having lots of dlc with a high total $ seems to have absolutely no impact on how people purchase.

People wanting to "try" something out buys bundles that already have large discounts, and then are a further 50-75% off during sales. Having more dlc then just increases the amount of people buying it.

The only thing that sucks is that you can't really group DLC in a meaningful way.

Can't you group DLC's in seasons like for Ck II? You could possibly after an amouth of time combine all 'season 1' dlc's into one pack (and do the same for music/sprites) so anyone can buy the whole host of dlc's easier without having to think 'ow, this is so much'.

 

[Wagonlitz]

We haven't noticed any customer behaviour thats different when we have loads of dlc for 200$ compared to hardly any dlc. Having lots of dlc with a high total $ seems to have absolutely no impact on how people purchase.

People wanting to "try" something out buys bundles that already have large discounts, and then are a further 50-75% off during sales. Having more dlc then just increases the amount of people buying it.

The only thing that sucks is that you can't really group DLC in a meaningful way.

Good to hear that it isn't affecting you. So just keep doing what you already do.

 

[Darkath]

While I agree the lists on Steam really need to be sorted or separated better, it always confuses me when people say lots of DLC is a turn off. "Oh hey, I heard this game is good, I sure hope there's little or no additional content for it! I really hate being able to get more of a game I enjoy!". If I enjoy a game I want more of it, and it's normally pretty easy to check if its DLCs are more content or just horse armour.

The "I told my friend to try this game but the number of DLCs made them avoid it" story is also really strange to me, as it implies the teller has friends who happily accept their game recommendations normally but at the same time refuse to believe their explanation that the base game is fun without it and the DLC is just optional fun extra content. It's such an oddly specific level of trust.

DLC is universally infamous in the industry. Blame Bethesda and other big publishers, with their horse armors, day one DLC featuring cut content or worse the actual ending of the game.
Especially since your legit expansions are buried under piles of Norse Portraits and random ebooks (by the way, what's the deal with them, do people actually buy those ?).
Micro-transactions (1-3$ dlc) on a full price game will always cause raised eyebrows.
Because you can't expect the new customer landing on a PDS game will instantly know that PDS is full of awesome people that actually cares about their customers and embodies the love and justice in this industry.


Also as i've said even if they are often on sale, the base price of games and old DLC never goes down. You'd think the base price of CK2 vanilla which is almost 3 year old, would go down after a while, so you can focus on selling the expansion rather than having a big entry barrier.

Another idea as some suggested is you could for instance bundle up all the pre Raja of india DLCs into packs for instance

For now people watching the unupdated CK2 store page would think : why would I pay 40€ for a 3 year old game and then have to buy 100€ worth of DLC for the "full game" ? The fact the vanilla game contains 3 years worth of update (including some massive map changes) isn't even advertised on the page.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

Also as i've said even if they are often on sale, the base price of games and old DLC never goes down. You'd think the base price of CK2 vanilla which is almost 3 year old, would go down after a while, so you can focus on selling the expansion rather than having a big entry barrier.

Why?

Revenue does not increase if you slash the baseprice. We did that quite alot before, and the only result was that we earned less money.

 

[Darkath]

Why?

Revenue does not increase if you slash the baseprice. We did that quite alot before, and the only result was that we earned less money.

Well i guess traditional rules of the market doesn't apply to PDS

 

[Wagonlitz]

Its a paradox!

 

[Chewy Yui]

The only thing that sucks is that you can't really group DLC in a meaningful way.

^This.

Even if the amount of DLC on the Steam page (CK2 in particular) does/doesn't put people off, P-dox having the ability to group all the cosmetic DLC from the actually gameplay content DLC would be a positive and likely, in the case of it putting people off, alleviate some of that concern, when they see there is 7(ish) actually Gameplay DLC they feel they need (and thus a lower overall price) as opposed to seeing 25(again idk exact number) DLC packs with a higher price point, that they think they need to get the complete gameplay experience.

Idk, If I'd never played a P-Dox game before, I'd be more inclined to buy CK2 if I was interested in it, seeing 7 actual "expansions" to gameplay, clearly marked in a category on steam, as opposed to the current list and higher price tag currently shown.

Well, just my two-cents. Obviously a steam flaw, that potentially impacts P-Dox negatively, if what others have said in this thread have merit

 

[loup99]

My only question: Why the e-books? They seem to be just confusing. And also, what was the sucess of the mini event packs (Crescent and Star, Purple Phoenix, American Dream) for EU4?

 

[Maarten99]

My only question: Why the e-books? They seem to be just confusing. And also, what was the sucess of the event packs for EU4?

Also : why event packs for EUIV but not for CKII ?

 

[Mikalos]

Also : why event packs for EUIV but not for CKII ?

there were: it was called legacy of rome

 

[ziziz223]

It'd be nice to have a full PDS subscription including absolutely everything from the Paradoxian Order to all PDS Games and DLC's!

Paradox pls.

 

[Wagonlitz]

My only question: Why the e-books? They seem to be just confusing. And also, what was the sucess of the mini event packs (Crescent and Star, Purple Phoenix, American Dream) for EU4?

Crescent and Star and Purple Phoenix were preorder bonus DLC (or were they call to arms bonusses?); American Dream was the backup preorder bonus in case the converter didn't get finished for the launch of EU4.

 

[loup99]

Crescent and Star and Purple Phoenix were preorder bonus DLC (or were they call to arms bonusses?); American Dream was the backup preorder bonus in case the converter didn't get finished for the launch of EU4.

Yes, I know that, but did many people buy them in preorder, and then later? Is this something that they are planning on continuing with future games or not? And etc.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Yes, I know that, but did many people buy them in preorder, and then later? Is this something that they are planning on continuing with future games or not? And etc.

I believe many people got them in preorder---just look at the amount of red EU4 icons---and the reason they were later put on sale is that people later asked for it. And I believe doing such preorders might be continueing. I haven't really followed HOI4, so I don't know what pre order bonusses it has, but I remember seeing a call to arms for it.

 

[DanJonMin]

Can't you group DLC's in seasons like for Ck II? You could possibly after an amouth of time combine all 'season 1' dlc's into one pack (and do the same for music/sprites) so anyone can buy the whole host of dlc's easier without having to think 'ow, this is so much'.

I actually think this is a great idea. Paradox have become somewhat infamous for releasing bundles that look like they're a "Complete Edition", but are instead just a collection of chosen DLC at the time the bundle is put together. I think it would save a lot of confusion if you had one bundle that included, say, all DLC prior to the 2.0 release of a game. We all know that by the time PDX release a game, they usually have the next 4 or so major DLC's already on the drawing board, so why not sell a sort of season pass (i'm sorry, i'm coming back to that sordid word) which includes all DLC to be (or that has already been) released from patch 1.0 to patch 1.Z, where Z is the final iteration of the 1.x version of the game.

That way, Paradox could say:

"We plan to release 4 major and 20 minor DLC over the next 18 months that will comprise of 1.x of the game. After 18 months we will take stock and make an executive decision as to whether or not we wish to extend the game's lifetime by another 18 months in to 2.x, at which point another DLC pass will be made available."

And if people really don't like the idea of pre-ordering DLC (Personally i'm in the camp where if I trust a developer I will pre-order until I get burnt, as a show of faith. This list comprises of PDS, Bioware and CD Projekt Red and i've not been hurt so far) then scrap the pre-release season pass and make it a post-release season pass. Put the 1.0-1.Z pass up for sale once patch 2.0 goes live.

 

[Maarten99]

"We plan to release 4 major and 20 minor DLC over the next 18 months that will comprise of 1.x of the game. After 18 months we will take stock and make an executive decision as to whether or not we wish to extend the game's lifetime by another 18 months in to 2.x, at which point another DLC pass will be made available."

Except it would put pressure on Paradox to release those DLC in the next 18 months, and set them in a strict schedule. If, for some reason - and there can be various reasons - Paradox can't keep up with that schedule, people will complain, and rightfully so.

Also, such a season pass is just a bad habit, for a customer, because you are giving money for the promise of a product. I often think a publisher is somewhat like a dog : great as long as they behave, but as soon as you become too permissive, they make your life a hell. And we wouldn't want PI to take up any bad habit, would we ?

 

[justin6477]

That way, Paradox could say:

"We plan to release 4 major and 20 minor DLC over the next 18 months that will comprise of 1.x of the game. After 18 months we will take stock and make an executive decision as to whether or not we wish to extend the game's lifetime by another 18 months in to 2.x, at which point another DLC pass will be made available."

I don't think that's really a good idea. Full disclosure, I've purchased every DLC that isn't an e-book for EU4 and CK2, even Sunset invasion, and I purchased them all on or shortly after launch (except Sunset Invasion, that was a 75% off thing) and I don't think I'd feel comfortable buying a product timeline. Instead, it may be more fruitful to bundle items AFTER the fact, as people above have suggested. So, basically, bundle the first year's (or whatever cycle works) worth of content as a single content bundle once you've started publishing year two's content. That way you're not making an implicit or explicit promise to your consumers about several mini-projects (besides, what's to stop all the DLCs from being Sunset Invasions rather than an appropriate mix of Res Publicas, AoWs, and CoPs?) and aren't bound to anything.

That being said, in addition to the way content is handled on the Steam store, it'd be nice to see content grouped within the launcher as well; doubly so if this could be extended to the mod page. Actual game-changing content, music, and visual fluff should not just get dumped together in a giant list.