Thanks Paradox! (and BTW...)

[zedyue]

Cute.

Lock it already?

So because I am from 4chan I am a troll? You clearly only posted those to undermine my "posting authority". Incidentally the bottom two are not me and I am here on my own. The second one is just my comment based on how I cannot resist arguing here because I like the game.

They talked about their post-release plans in dev diary iirc. The feedback in EU3 was pretty one sided - the large expansions made for disjointed communities and excessive cost when you might only want one of the later expansions. It also sucks hardcore when you don't buy an expansion and all support for your game comes to a halt.

I guess I will live with it.

 

[Pelarys]

I feel like we had a rather constructive if purely theoretical discussion so really there's no need to dismiss his opinions especially since we kept it civil.

 

[MrTaxman]

I feel like we had a rather constructive if purely theoretical discussion so really there's no need to dismiss his opinions especially since we kept it civil.

Agreed.


Sorry, I was out at a birthday party.


So it seems that the big issue is MP compatibility. Personally I don't do MP, so that has never been an issue for me - but I can see where a full v DLC expansion would come into it. But you could solve it the same way - just patch the game for the map, but only have the minimum necessary changes in the patch. Et voila, you have your MP compatibility and the rest of us have a butt-load of content all at once.

Problem solved? (Not ruddy likely)

 

[BBBD316]

I have to say that I think Paradox's model is far superior to the old model, I have just about every EU, CK, HOI, Rome version, but with EU3 I had never bought an expansions. Why cause they took so long to come out that I had moved on, despite being a hardcore PI fan, I am also into BioShock, Uncharted, AC, etc. plus I like to do real life things.

With the new model, it keeps changing enough for me to continue to want to play, in fact I played SOI last night as a muslim and the experience was completely different definitely worth my $10. I also bought the other DLC's I may not really need them, heck I play with the sound off and I have all the songs. But I want the best experience from my game, supporting Paradox means they will continue to provide me with updates and new content regularly. As a consumer I want things now and I really don't care about the price as long as Paradox continue their long history of providing quality.

Also with a large number of developers either going bust or downsizing and others taking to kickstarter to try and get funds to develop games, I think we need to be mindful that if we don't support those that provide good games we will eventually be stuck with the large developers like EA that don't give a rats toss bag about their consumers. So pick your poison.

On a side note, I think most other countries would consider Obama a liberal, not a socialist. In fact he is a pretty poor liberal, the Tea Party would probably be considered so right wing as to be off the electable chart in Australia.:happy:

 

[Malarious]

After reading through this thread, it seems there are two main fallacies in the arguments opposing this form of DLC:

1. That 80% of the content (or even the majority of the content) is provided for free. This is not true. The only features included in 1.06 that could even be considered 'major' would be strong/weak claims and combat traits. Formable empires have been prolific in the modding community, and are not a significant change. There are a handful of new events for everyone, but there are many, many, many more for Muslims. There are also a ridiculous number of Muslim-specific traits, and the Muslim mechanics are completely different from Christian mechanics. I just finished a campaign, and it barely felt like CK2 -- the changes in SoI are much more drastic than the horde or Japan changes in DW.

2. That the non-SoI features of 1.06 are being paid for by the people who purchase SoI. Crusader Kings 2 hasn't even been out for six months. It's not unreasonable for people to expect continued support for the product they purchased. Here's an example from another one of Paradox's games: Victoria: A House Divided had a patch released (2.3) that added about as many features as non-SoI 1.06 CK2. These features weren't provided hand-in-hand with a DLC, they were provided for free, to people who bought AHD. Continued support of software is all but expected.

With or without SoI, we would've gotten 1.06. Without SoI, people who bought CK2 would instead find their product no longer being supported the moment a new 'expansion' is released. The key tenet of Paradox's DLC scheme is modularity. People who initially bought CK2 can expect CK2 to continue to get better. DLC will be released which is entirely modular and adds additional features for those who wish to pay for them. It is the best option for the consumer -- we get faster, more frequent updates, and we get to choose which features we want to pay for.

If I had no interest in playing as a Muslim (and I'm sure there are quite a few people who don't) I could simply choose not to buy SoI and the product I bought five months ago would continue to be supported. Playing as a Catholic would continue to get better with patches! If Paradox relied on larger expansions, I'd be required to pay for additional features that I might not even want, the base game I bought would cease to be supported, and the multiplayer community I play in would be fractured. If Paradox were truly trying to nickel-and-dime us, they'd continue with their old model, which all but forces consumers to pay for every update, even when the original might still be in need of bugfixes or otherwise incomplete.

To use AHD as an example: vanilla Victoria 2, to me, feels like an incomplete game. With AHD, it actually feels like a proper Paradox title. I can't imagine playing without AHD, honestly, and seeing the number of people that don't own it is astonishing. That example is basically the complete opposite of CK2, and I'm glad they're moving away from such a business model.

 

[MrTaxman]

After reading through this thread, it seems there are two main fallacies in the arguments opposing this form of DLC:

1. That 80% of the content (or even the majority of the content) is provided for free. This is not true. The only features included in 1.06 that could even be considered 'major' would be strong/weak claims and combat traits. Formable empires have been prolific in the modding community, and are not a significant change. There are a handful of new events for everyone, but there are many, many, many more for Muslims. There are also a ridiculous number of Muslim-specific traits, and the Muslim mechanics are completely different from Christian mechanics. I just finished a campaign, and it barely felt like CK2 -- the changes in SoI are much more drastic than the horde or Japan changes in DW.

2. That the non-SoI features of 1.06 are being paid for by the people who purchase SoI. Crusader Kings 2 hasn't even been out for six months. It's not unreasonable for people to expect continued support for the product they purchased. Here's an example from another one of Paradox's games: Victoria: A House Divided had a patch released (2.3) that added about as many features as non-SoI 1.06 CK2. These features weren't provided hand-in-hand with a DLC, they were provided for free, to people who bought AHD. Continued support of software is all but expected.

With or without SoI, we would've gotten 1.06. Without SoI, people who bought CK2 would instead find their product no longer being supported the moment a new 'expansion' is released. The key tenet of Paradox's DLC scheme is modularity. People who initially bought CK2 can expect CK2 to continue to get better. DLC will be released which is entirely modular and adds additional features for those who wish to pay for them. It is the best option for the consumer -- we get faster, more frequent updates, and we get to choose which features we want to pay for.

If I had no interest in playing as a Muslim (and I'm sure there are quite a few people who don't) I could simply choose not to buy SoI and the product I bought five months ago would continue to be supported. Playing as a Catholic would continue to get better with patches! If Paradox relied on larger expansions, I'd be required to pay for additional features that I might not even want, the base game I bought would cease to be supported, and the multiplayer community I play in would be fractured. If Paradox were truly trying to nickel-and-dime us, they'd continue with their old model, which all but forces consumers to pay for every update, even when the original might still be in need of bugfixes or otherwise incomplete.

To use AHD as an example: vanilla Victoria 2, to me, feels like an incomplete game. With AHD, it actually feels like a proper Paradox title. I can't imagine playing without AHD, honestly, and seeing the number of people that don't own it is astonishing. That example is basically the complete opposite of CK2, and I'm glad they're moving away from such a business model.

That is a well thought out argument. I appreciate the time and effort you put into thinking that out.

I have to say, that with your comments (and those of others) I am inclined to agree a bit more. However, it does not invalidate a point I made earlier (whether you consider SOI an expansion or just a simple DLC) SoI was set with too high a price for it not to be a "full" expansion.

 

[BBBD316]

Taxman,

Would your preference be for 4 relatively quick releases of DLC that would make a complete game within 12-18 months or wait the 2 years + that often accompanies the full expansion?

Just a query, not having a go, just curious.

 

[MylesSCP]

That is a well thought out argument. I appreciate the time and effort you put into thinking that out.

I have to say, that with your comments (and those of others) I am inclined to agree a bit more. However, it does not invalidate a point I made earlier (whether you consider SOI an expansion or just a simple DLC) SoI was set with too high a price for it not to be a "full" expansion.

I'm used to seeing new expansions priced at $30, so I don't see how $10 is outrageous for what we got.

 

[MrTaxman]

Taxman,

Would your preference be for 4 relatively quick releases of DLC that would make a complete game within 12-18 months or wait the 2 years + that often accompanies the full expansion?

Just a query, not having a go, just curious.

I didn't think you were having a go

I like getting content quickly (who doesn't?), but sometimes DLCs seem like a piddly amount of content (I don't think SoI is piddly - but you must admit that DLCs can go that way).

In short - I don't know if I could honestly answer your question either way. I haven't thought about it enough. I suppose that is one of the purposes of this thread.

 

[MrTaxman]

I'm used to seeing new expansions priced at $30, so I don't see how $10 is outrageous for what we got.

As I said to BBBD316, I don't think SoI is a "crummy commercial", but I fear that the next DLCs could easily be, and that the success of SoI would 'justify' the release of a pathetic amount of content and charging too much for it.

Again, I reiterate that I haven't had enough time to digest the argument on both sides, so I'm now on the fence about this one.

 

[BBBD316]

Mr. Taxman,

I can see your point and I think a drop in quality from Paradox would result in people dropping off the DLC bandwagon.

 

[Johan]

After reading through this thread, it seems there are two main fallacies in the arguments opposing this form of DLC:

1. That 80% of the content (or even the majority of the content) is provided for free. This is not true. The only features included in 1.06 that could even be considered 'major' would be strong/weak claims and combat traits. Formable empires have been prolific in the modding community, and are not a significant change. There are a handful of new events for everyone, but there are many, many, many more for Muslims. There are also a ridiculous number of Muslim-specific traits, and the Muslim mechanics are completely different from Christian mechanics. I just finished a campaign, and it barely felt like CK2 -- the changes in SoI are much more drastic than the horde or Japan changes in DW.

2. That the non-SoI features of 1.06 are being paid for by the people who purchase SoI. Crusader Kings 2 hasn't even been out for six months. It's not unreasonable for people to expect continued support for the product they purchased. Here's an example from another one of Paradox's games: Victoria: A House Divided had a patch released (2.3) that added about as many features as non-SoI 1.06 CK2. These features weren't provided hand-in-hand with a DLC, they were provided for free, to people who bought AHD. Continued support of software is all but expected.

With or without SoI, we would've gotten 1.06. Without SoI, people who bought CK2 would instead find their product no longer being supported the moment a new 'expansion' is released. The key tenet of Paradox's DLC scheme is modularity. People who initially bought CK2 can expect CK2 to continue to get better. DLC will be released which is entirely modular and adds additional features for those who wish to pay for them. It is the best option for the consumer -- we get faster, more frequent updates, and we get to choose which features we want to pay for.

If I had no interest in playing as a Muslim (and I'm sure there are quite a few people who don't) I could simply choose not to buy SoI and the product I bought five months ago would continue to be supported. Playing as a Catholic would continue to get better with patches! If Paradox relied on larger expansions, I'd be required to pay for additional features that I might not even want, the base game I bought would cease to be supported, and the multiplayer community I play in would be fractured. If Paradox were truly trying to nickel-and-dime us, they'd continue with their old model, which all but forces consumers to pay for every update, even when the original might still be in need of bugfixes or otherwise incomplete.

To use AHD as an example: vanilla Victoria 2, to me, feels like an incomplete game. With AHD, it actually feels like a proper Paradox title. I can't imagine playing without AHD, honestly, and seeing the number of people that don't own it is astonishing. That example is basically the complete opposite of CK2, and I'm glad they're moving away from such a business model.

To adress a few points.

1) The following are major free stuff for 1.06 that would NEVER have been in a patch with the old model, it would have been in the "first expansion this autumn" if we had done it the EU3 or Hoi3 style. With major we mean features that take a certain amount of time to develop and are scheduled as actual features.

- Expanded map in Africa with new provinces and new countries.
- Countries named after dynasties for some cultures.
- New creatable empires.
- New plots to get claims and changed plots for
- Strong and Weak Claims.
- Improved Event Interface with traits shown on buttons.
- Overhauled combat mechanics with new combat tactics & commanding traits.
- Culture specific buildings.
- Destruction of titles.
- Major sypport for modders with files broken up into directories and lots of new events & triggers.

And the features for 1.05
- Joining into wars.
- New Crusades Mechanic
- New event series for Regencies.
- New event series for Friendship & Rivalries.
- Cause of Death mechanics.
- New plots for revoking titles.
- New Kingdoms.


2) No, without this business model, we would NOT have 1.06 today... With it, we've got far more budget for patching and have a full team for it. Usually we've had a team working for 1 month after release on the 2nd patch, and then 1 programmer for another 2 months for the 3rd patch, with maybe occasional fixes during the next 3 months for a final patch. We would have had a 1.05 without the new features released at this time.

 

[unmerged(271387)]

His all mightness has replied :O PRAISE AND GLORY TO THE GOD OF METAL!
I like the way paradox handles DLCs if you don't like them don't buy them

 

[Bad_Haggis]

Hear Hear!

 

[AlexanderXII]

Ok one question to you guys. Would you rather take the old EU3 expansion system where it locked you away from MP if you didin't keep up with the latest expansion. OR would you just like the same everyone gets to play MP, but with more fleshed out DLC content and not this socialism thing you disagree?

 

[unmerged(67329)]

Ok one question to you guys. Would you rather take the old EU3 expansion system where it locked you away from MP if you didin't keep up with the latest expansion. OR would you just like the same everyone gets to play MP, but with more fleshed out DLC content and not this socialism thing you disagree?

For me personally the new system is quite a boon. My brother is crazy about paradox games so its not a problem for him. But it´s quite nice that we can now play together with my girlfriend and another one of my friends, without them having to drop a crazy amount of money on a game just so they can play it with us in MP.

But i guess you knew already that im in favor of the new system .

EDIT: misunderstood your question.

Now that i understood it i disagree with the premise, actually. I think that the content of SoI is quite nicely fleshed out (muslim gameplay).

What some people want is to have hugely improved core gameplay features in a DLC. This would make them much more "attractive" but it could never be reconciled with having the MP compatibility. So i think its kind of impossible to have both.

 

[Yazman]

It's stupid to me that people complain about the way it works. If you're too cheap to buy the expansion then don't complain about not getting to play muslims. It's such an entitled mentality.

 

[Gedierond]

I´m really glad that this thread was able to be kept civil. It was a really interesting discussion from both parts. Regretably, I don´t think a compromise between both expansion/DLC policies can be reached (or at least, I can´t think of a way that could work where everyone gets what they want). In the end it´s up to PI to decide which policy they think works better for them and their customers. Some of us will like it, while some of us won´t. The important thing is always to express ourselves in a civil way and respect each other´s opinions, as well as the devs´ opinions and work.

 

[Malarious]

snip

And my arguments are completely obliterated by PDS themselves! Hehe, I figured the truth would be something like that -- it's obvious how many advantages the new system offers, and I'm glad Paradox is open about this. Thanks for your response, Johan, and apologies; I certainly did disregard a great deal of the new 1.06 features.

The main discussion in the thread seemed to centre around people that want all additional content withheld from others if they don't pay -- they wanted the features collected, bottled up, and sold as a major expansion a few months later... a business model that is starting to feel seriously antiquated.

I can't find (m)any problems with Paradox's new DLC policy. It really does mean more features more frequently for as many of us as possible, which is basically the holy grail of game development. I'm sure so long as the DLCs continue to deliver as much bang-for-the-buck as SoI, the naysayers will cease eventually.

Literally the only problem I can think of: if there's eventually an Orthodox DLC, fans would be up-in-arms if the ability to play Orthodox was taken away from those without the DLC, as unlike with Muslims, the ability to play Orthodox was part of the game at release. This either means there won't be an Orthodox DLC, the Orthodox features will be rolled out to everyone piecemeal with other patches, or Paradox will release the Orthodox DLC for free (maybe as a thank-you to the fans for their continued support? This is probably wishful thinking though, hehe).

 

[zedyue]

No, without this business model, we would NOT have 1.06 today... With it, we've got far more budget for patching and have a full team for it. Usually we've had a team working for 1 month after release on the 2nd patch, and then 1 programmer for another 2 months for the 3rd patch, with maybe occasional fixes during the next 3 months for a final patch. We would have had a 1.05 without the new features released at this time.

I suppose I didn't understand everything when I began arguing and I understand quite a bit more now. Out of curiosity, are there any talks about the possibility of bringing this new model to older games you have either stopped supporting or have limited support for? Or is it incomparable with games that worked with the old model due to the separate expansions being incompatable.

It's stupid to me that people complain about the way it works. If you're too cheap to buy the expansion then don't complain about not getting to play muslims. It's such an entitled mentality.

That was never the problem. Don't talk about things you don't know about without at least reading the thread. People on both sides of the argument have and have not bought the DLC.