CKII Subscription Service

[Pyrrós tou Ípeiros]

Why are people so mad about this, I don't get it..... I'm down for this, as long as we are still have the option to buy the dlc permenantly. This could be great for people who prefer playing for a few weeks and offing off, also for people who just want to try the game at it's fullest without paying atleast 100 eurors.

 

[Herr B.]

Why are people so mad about this, I don't get it..... I'm down for this, as long as we are still have the option to buy the dlc permenantly. This could be great for people who prefer playing for a few weeks and offing off, also for people who just want to try the game at it's fullest without paying atleast 100 eurors.

The permanent option IS going to go away. Every company which introduced a subscription service either increased the permanent prices drastically or removed the option entirely.

PDX is lying to you, my dear. Welcome to the real world.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

Howdy all,

[Truncated]...

If Paradox does want to explore options for Subscription, then only offer a Sub for the ENTIRE Paradox game catalogue, and price it accordingly, because then you're offering a Subscription to be part of a Community, not just a past-generation game. I just can't get on board with individual game subscriptions, and even more so for a game such as CK2 -- that is now the prior edition and originally published for PCs with Pentium IV, 2 GB of RAM, and compatible across Windows XP/Vista/7 -- just to put into historic perspective. The normal practice was - past generation games moved toward deeper-cut sale events over time, eventually an all-in-one "Complete Edition" was offered and you moved on to focus on the current generation/edition of the game.

Bear in mind, I subscribed before you even existed - to the first-ever MMORPG, because that was before Steam, back when PC Game Boxes still existed on store shelves, and you had to buy the CD(s) of the game to install before you even tried to connect online. That - I can believe in, both then and now, that some AAA Games that are Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO), and especially the MMORPGs that grew extremely large online player bases, those were a "Community" all their own.

CK2 isn't a Community, it's a game. And it's a game that I may want to put in 50 hours this month, to see how I fare as a Welch Petty King. And then I may ignore the game for months, or a year, and then try some other strategy. Ownership matters for this game, playing offline on a whim, perhaps with zero internet connectivity in a cabin in the woods, at night - yeah, that's a thing. The predominance of your player base in Grand Strategy games - are NOT multiplayer types, or at least at that time in their gaming life, are not concerned with connecting into an MMO. CK2 is played single-player, especially when stuck at home for varying reasons, or stuck in a college dorm, or whatever in life has one isolated to try and find something to keep your mind busy in a make-believe game of world domination (or at least regional domination).

And you have other great games! Don't get me wrong - you Paradox employees, Swedish or otherwise, you are great minds and game-coders, although I still could teach you a thing or two about how to make your tactical battles/gameplay better (just play old Sierra Games' title - "Lords of the Realm 2" in its original DOS format to see how one can effectively go from Strategic/Big-Picture view down to a fun Tactical level, AND get some humorous audio clips from your soldiers in the fight, to boot).

We love you, but we don't love your subscription offer for a game, even if it's CK2. I am biased - I've had the CK2 Imperial Collection on my Wishlist for a year now - and I need ownership, not a monthly system (and I don't even want online verification, if I'm not on the net when I play the game!). Many of us simply want ownership at a fair price, especially for a product in a past-generation status, not a monthly payment system. I also want confidence that when/if I take Full Ownership of CK2, that my ownership will be respected with game-critical patches to keep my game running, even when we have new Windows Operating Systems introduced (just like Win XP/Vista/7 were ALL ensured compatible when you first developed CK2!!!). FYI, I still play CK1 now and then, just to experience the more simple/basic game that CK1 was. Most Paradox gamers will never experience original CK1, in all its glorious simplicity and quirkiness, and cartoony character profiles (that I adored!), but consider - a Community could experience such. A Community with a subscription to your entire catalogue would have access to original CK1, even if only to quickly see how it looked and operated. Having said that - there are Communities out there without Fees/Subscriptions, such as Steam, but then Ownership is what you're normally paying for. So, it's getting competitive out there, players have choices, but I think in your effort to give choices, you've given your Community a mixed message as to how you will handle the aging of your game catalogue. Are you building a Community, or building up payment options for an aging and premium priced game catalogue?

 

[Revshawn]

Remember Paradox. People can and will go elsewhere. Grand Strategy Games are a niche gaming market regardless of how much you try to simplify it. And between Ultimate General, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Total War, Civ, Bannerlord, and many others there is more than enough games out there for me to spend my time on than if you overprice your own games/DLC or try to get people hooked on subscription services like this.

One day you're going to wake up and there's going to be a up and coming company that can make your own games better than you can. And they're going to kick your ass.

 

[AngelRay]

Good (and bad?) intentions behind it.
In the end, it's all about taking money from people forgetting about it.

I think i'm out of that trap since i will not pay subscription for anything on steam or related to gaming, but i can relate for those players who, as in other matters in life, will be victims fo such psychological traps.

If it's about good intentions only, then do a lease type contract: pay per month then when you have payed the price, own.

As some people, i personnaly would never want a game which obliges me to be online. Steam can be played offline. I do not do it much but when my internet is down, it's nice to be able to play. (Thanks that i have my switch console if i don't have my "wanted" game installed in steam ^^")

One day you're going to wake up and there's going to be a up and coming company that can make your own games better than you can. And they're going to kick your ass.

I'm really looking forward for competition because paradox has become (since 2016 when i received EU4 from a friend) complacent. Even the "imperator" big DLC for EU4 which was hype... was a total disappointment.
Since Golden century i buy DLC to complete my game, but not with passion and I say to any friend: "i do it because those games are what i love, but paradox is terrible, don't fall prey unless those type of games are your loved ones... and then they would already be your, so don't do it"

If Amplitude (whose 4X endless space 1 was exceptionnal) could compete with you, i'd like it very much since they would force you to make better games.

Golden century was the dream killer. The DLC which was not about what it should have been.

CK3 may be the appearance of light again. But even if i love CK3, EU4 is my favorite so... dream killed. Again, golden century, the worst dlc ever imo.

 

[wyhyed12288]

I also want to point out that you can still buy everything the old-school way if you prefer

 

[AngelRay]

Of course, but i already own it.
I'm commenting for the players i feel will fall for those kind of prey the weak minded people who will not understand that 12 months = almost all dlcs at a sale price. They think it's good. It may. It is not in the long term.

But alas, money is killing the dreams more and more often in this world.

 

[Salociin]

I support the three ideals of Humanism: Liberty, Egality and Fraternity. Freedom is good, but you need to guarantee the other two as well.

"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free."

Equality (Egality) has to be enforced, artificially. "Equality" as modern liberalism understands it doesn't exist in nature. Ergo, you cannot have both true freedom and true equality, you have to choose which one is more important to you, and to your values.

 

[jonjowett]

One day you're going to wake up and there's going to be a up and coming company that can make your own games better than you can. And they're going to kick your ass.

To give an example that might resonate with Paradox: Cities Skylines vs SimCity.

 

[Herr B.]

"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free."

Equality (Egality) has to be enforced, artificially. "Equality" as modern liberalism understands it doesn't exist in nature. Ergo, you cannot have both true freedom and true equality, you have to choose which one is more important to you, and to your values.

The quote you're referring to is completely right. However, your conclusion not so much.

In the real world, there is no such thing as complete freedom or complete equality. Every society has a bit of both, the only thing they differ upon is the balance between these two. And when I wrote, I support both, I meant, that both are important and should be balanced.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

Full Disclosure, because my situation is exactly why customers have concerns, and I hope my budget-minded decision gives me the most CK2 enjoyment for the cost.
I have been a long-time Paradox games player, only more recently registered to this site once the verification processes started after I bought Stellaris, but for the last 2 years, I have waited patiently for the price point on CK2 to come down - specifically for the packages that bundled everything, now known as the "Imperial Collection" in Steam (which at full price is over $300 US).

I just bought the Imperial Collection, as stated in my prior post - I wanted Ownership from the beginning, not a lease on the game. There are two things to consider from my purchase decision that relates to this entire thread:

1. I paid under 12 months' cost of renting CK2 in US funds for a "key" from a 3rd party vendor that I only recently became aware of, so that's under $60 US. Thoughts on this price and this Key vending market that I recently became aware of - these are significant discounts in contrast to current prices offered direct from Paradox, and from Valve/Steam, and it makes me wonder what is spinning in the background to create this grey market where some know, some don't, and some will overpay for the game in normal retail markets (which I realize, in history, happens all the time for Retail Customers!). However, it does speak toward what the "value" is for full-ownership of CK2, because this new price was just set over this weekend, and it is very apparent that they priced it at almost exactly what 1-year of the Subscription costs.

2. I now wonder if the full owners of the game such as myself, will continue to see CK2 patched into major updates of current Windows OS, and if it will be patched into the next-gen/future Windows OS as well. This is a concern as an owner, and should be a concern for all full/part-owners of CK2 in contrast to this individual game subscription. What customers will/won't be taken care of for the longer term?

 

[dave1927p]

I hope this subscription service idea crashes and burns. The last thing paradox needs more is further incentive to Nickel and dime their core fan base. This is sickening like most of their DLC.

 

[CarringtonT]

For those asking what the problem with this is: the problem is twofold:
One, the value is just not there. Now 5€/$ isn't much when compared to the price of the complete CK2 edition, that's true, but compared to other subscription models?
EA Play is also 5€/$ a month, unless you pay yearly, then it's just 2.5€/$ a month. That gives you Star Wars Fallen Order & Battlefront 1&2, C&C Remastered, C&C Ultimate, Battlefield 1 & V, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Sims and Sim City, the sport games up to 20, a lot of other games, and 10% off of any purchase.
XBox Game Pass for PC costs 9.99€/$ a month, includes everything from EA Play, a lot of Microsoft and Bethesda Games, EU IV, CK3, Imperator Rome, and lots of other games.
5 €/$ for a single game is incredibly expensive and they are hoping to role it out to other games as well. So, what is the endgame? A 5 €/$ subscription per game seems rather likely, if incredibly bad value.

And two, their explanation for why they offer the subscription is an obvious lie. Yes, they are absolutely right when they say that the price for the complete CK2 edition is prohibitively expensive for new players. But the problem is that they themselves control the prices and the sale offers. If they, rightfully, believe that the Crusader Kings II: Imperial Collection Bundle is too expensive for new players, then they could have easily set its base price to, idk, 60 €/$. Add regular 50% off sales, and maybe one in a while for anniversaries a 75% off sale, and the game is suddenly affordable again. Barriers to entry are removed, new players actually own the game, and Paradox makes more money from people that would have subscribed for a month or five and then cancelled. That sound like wins all around to me. Of course, that would mean that Paradox doesn't get continuous money from people that forgot to cancel their sub, but since preying on that is an obvious scummy move, not doing that is a rather good thing.

 

[Kayden_II]

There's an other alternative:

Keep this 5-bucks-per-month-price-tag as a subscription, but once a player had already payed a certain amount of bucks after a certain amount of time ( like 20 bucks after 4 months ) then he / she can choose for free his / her first DLC ( a major one here, because it costs 20 bucks, too ).

I would just keep it that if you buy something immediately then it should still be cheaper compared to a subscription-model: For a major DLC, it would ( still ) cost its 20 bucks if you would buy it immediately, but in the subscription-case, it should cost at least 25 bucks after 5 months.

But no, that's not greedy enough, right ?

 

[DragonAtma]

Oh look, it spread to EU4. So much for the "but, but it's only for a single game!" claims.

Slippery slope is in full effect.

 

[CarringtonT]

Oh look, it spread to EU4. So much for the "but, but it's only for a single game!" claims.

Slippery slope is in full effect.

And it's also 5€/$ a month. So, the endgame is, as I feared, a 5€/$ subscription per game. So, right now, we are at 10 €/$ per month for CK2 and EUIV. When will we get the same subscription for CK3, I:R, HoIIV, and Stellaris? I doubt I'll ever be okay with a subscription service instead of reasonable price drops, but 5€/$ per month for the Paradox Development Studio catalog seems rather reasonable. 30€/$ per month on the other hand would be anything but okay.

Edit: What I'm really worried about is the effect the subscription model has on future pricing. Paradox already got rid of sales that offered more then a 50% discount on DLC years ago, who's to say that they won't change that again and only offer worse discounts in the future? If they offer a subscription service, they obviously want it to be successful and the best way to encourage people to subscribe is to make (well, or to be more precise: keep) the complete game prohibitively expensive to buy.

 

[R.Graymarch]

I'm still against subscription.
I find that 5€ per game and per month is super expensive in theory. But in reality, a Paradox game takes time I imagine that most people can easily spend one full month on a game. The "only" issue I find is for the people who subscribed for Game1, do not like it after 5 days and subscribe for Game2 for another 5€. A "game switching possibility" (or a "Paradox pass") could be welcome
And still, subscription is only acceptable to me if it stays an option to play the game.

 

[Oglesby]

FYI we in support regularly get people begging to be let onto the EU4 subscription programme. I could count the number of complaints I've seen on one hand.


@PDX_Pariah @BjornB the EU4 trial subscription programme is Windows only. Is this one like that too, or does it cover all OSs?

And does it come with a way of disabling individual DLCs? It can be done in EU4 by manually editing text files, but it's manual and clumsy.

Wait, I was supposed to be complaining to support because there was a subscription model being tested in Eu4? I thought that trying to participate in the threads talking about the sub models was the appropriate venue. I guess I can start now, would you prefer the support tickets weekly ?

(i.e. I don't think your metric is valid)

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

Wait, I was supposed to be complaining to support because there was a subscription model being tested in Eu4? I thought that trying to participate in the threads talking about the sub models was the appropriate venue. I guess I can start now, would you prefer them weekly support tickets?

(i.e. I don't think your metric is valid)

Yeah that's a "Party Foul" on the part of Paradox employees who probably don't work business statistics in the Real World. Having a motivated group of volunteers to pay for Subscription in game X doesn't mean it can extrapolate out to acceptance by the total Y factor of the game's current part-owners and would-be buyers vs subscribers. It only tells Paradox what % of the current gamer pool wants to get a subscription.

It's a self-licking Ice Cream Cone in slang description of a Statistical flaw to rate group acceptance.

 

[hquad]

Subscription costs more, and as a person who spends maybe a day a month playing a particular game, it does not make sense at all for me. Paradox could stick to upgrade harvesting (aka "DLC"). However, with a subscription, the margin is much higher. Also, as others have explained, Paradox' stakes are lower. People will not unsubscribe (aka "the nuclear option") just because one DLC is bad. Sad to see that Paradox is going down that route. I for one will not subscribe.