New Kickstarter Update

[Valaska]

Y'know, there's a few Paradox DLC that are not, I feel, worth the pricetag.

But not many.

People just look at the full price for years worth of DLC and go "MONEYGRUBBING" but really, I pay like 15/30 bucks maybe twice a year?

Yeah, no. I FULLY expect Paradox to outright charge us for the upcommingfix to turn speeds etc, they will probably piecemeal the patch and then sell it to us bit, by bit, by bit. They won't be coming out with quality length campaigns, maybe tiny one off missions for $15-30.

ANY fix to the game, and feature, any change will now cost us money. Paradox is the greediest money grubbingest company out there and they will continue to operate in a "pay for any/all fixes! Its ongoing development!"

Seriously, no longer will you get fixes or patches, welcome to the Nickle Dime company.

 

[Funkin Disher]

Yeah, no. I FULLY expect Paradox to outright charge us for the upcommingfix to turn speeds etc, they will probably piecemeal the patch and then sell it to us bit, by bit, by bit. They won't be coming out with quality length campaigns, maybe tiny one off missions for $15-30.

ANY fix to the game, and feature, any change will now cost us money. Paradox is the greediest money grubbingest company out there and they will continue to operate in a "pay for any/all fixes! Its ongoing development!"

Seriously, no longer will you get fixes or patches, welcome to the Nickle Dime company.

I'm not saying I don't believe you, but i'd like to see it happen before I order my torch and pitchfork.

 

[Valaska]

When we say more BT, we think of more indepth expansions, more mechanics and content. When Paradox says more of anything, it's usually side-grade fluff like cosmetic, faction, faction portrait, etc etc. Paradox have near unlimited historic resources to draw from with their EU series but when they have to think up their own stuff like Stellaris, the quality of DLCs are far more mediocre. BT has far less content to do nickle and dime DLCs on while on the other hand, so established you can't just whip out a brand new faction either. I know there's potential of mech packs but PGI and Catalyst are uniforming designs across all platforms so HBS can't just whip out a bunch of mechs on their own.

We'll see how much control HBS actually retains.

This... Mirrors a lot of my feelings. If HBS doesn't get full creative license they'll start nickle and diming us for every little bug fix, mechanics update, everything. Tiny ltitle one off missions here and there, a boen thrown to us with "free" fixes when the most important fixes are paygated and only do one feature at a time bit by bit.

I'm not saying I don't believe you, but i'd like to see it happen before I order my torch and pitchfork.

I feel you, but maybe we can stop HBS from becomming this just greedy money grubbing company that we see so often these days if we speak up and say we want SUBSTANTIAL and GOOD expansions, not little tiny pieces of content with 5 forum avatars, a special badge on the forum, and one fix with and POSSIBLY a single tiny story mission.

I want to progress I want to see what happens on the rim, I want to work inwards and have stories of intrigue and politics, not random little events and 10-20 minutes of content for $15-30 like Stellaris or their other games. [mod edit: dismissive]

 

[Funkin Disher]

So the best way we can do that as consumers is to vote with our wallets. This means we as a community need to maintain buying discipline in order to send that message, which can be very hard especially since it was Kickstarted in the first place and you can't control what other fans are willing to pay for.

The company won't go under if we don't buy DLC, they don't need our charity. If it isn't worth it to you, don't buy it.

 

[Eelectrica]

A new campaign DLC I'll buy in a second.

 

[Hatchy]

Congratulations gang! Very happy that y'all have a little bit of financial security going forward and I am happy that this union cements future Battletech titles. I understand the stresses of an uncertain future, so this must be a huge relief!

If you're happy with the deal I will convince myself to be happy about it too.

 

[Eelectrica]

Yeah, no. I FULLY expect Paradox to outright charge us for the upcommingfix to turn speeds etc, they will probably piecemeal the patch and then sell it to us bit, by bit, by bit. They won't be coming out with quality length campaigns, maybe tiny one off missions for $15-30.

ANY fix to the game, and feature, any change will now cost us money. Paradox is the greediest money grubbingest company out there and they will continue to operate in a "pay for any/all fixes! Its ongoing development!"

Seriously, no longer will you get fixes or patches, welcome to the Nickle Dime company.

Your paranoia does not equal fact. History tells us the free Paradox updates are very large in size and features.
Surviving Mars has had a whole bunch of stuff added that they would have liked to include at release, much like Battletech.

Hopefully expansions will come though. New story campaigns, environments and mechs would all be welcome additions in paid expansions.

 

[Carl_Bar]

Yeah, no. I FULLY expect Paradox to outright charge us for the upcommingfix to turn speeds etc, they will probably piecemeal the patch and then sell it to us bit, by bit, by bit. They won't be coming out with quality length campaigns, maybe tiny one off missions for $15-30.

ANY fix to the game, and feature, any change will now cost us money. Paradox is the greediest money grubbingest company out there and they will continue to operate in a "pay for any/all fixes! Its ongoing development!"

Seriously, no longer will you get fixes or patches, welcome to the Nickle Dime company.

Sorry but both CKII and Stellaris want words with you. Neither of those where characterised by overpriced micro-updates, lack of free bug fixes, or even a lack of free major mechanics overhauls.

 

[me987654]

Paradox, like any other company, isn't perfect... but they are certainly not a pile of garbage like EA or Ubisoft. They make good games and clearly have a passion for strategy gaming and are much more gamer focused than many other companies. They go out of their way to make their games very mod friendly and make games that appeal to audiences that other developers ignore.

Also - if paradox has anyone on staff that knows how to fix the freaking unity GC lag that would be really, really awesome

 

[AussieGiant]

Pdox might not be perfect... but no one is perfect other than me.

Are you born after 1988?

 

[AussieGiant]

I just bought CK II plus all the DLC in one hit. I'm lucky to be in a position where I can do this. However, I did think; "Gosh that was expensive."

Then I found out CK2 has been running for 6 years and Paradox have a substantial full-time team on the game. Paradox have released 14 pieces of content in that time and is planning further DLC this year. Just think for a moment how much it costs to have a dedicated team on this game each year? Salaries alone would be substantial.

I can only think of a handful of games that have been supported to this level at any time over the last 20 years. Admittedly CK2 is not graphic intensive so its longevity is therefore not dependent on newish graphics engines.

Really the only thing to critically assess in these 14 DLC’s is the price vs quantity and quality of the DLC. From a number of different sources, the DLC’s have been well rated and received.

Therefore, I do not understand the statements about piecemeal DLC’s that should be free or update and patches that have to be paid for.

 

[BCGaius]

I would not have this (<---) pile of Paradox games unless I thought Paradox was very good at what they do. HBS and Paradox seem like a natural fit, and more Battletech means I'm happy.

Haters gonna hate, I suppose... I'm baffled by the sheer amount of people who intrinsically seem to assume bad faith on the part of Paradox (nevermind that their policies are objectively beneficial to you, the consumer, especially since they are competing in some ways with the big, actually scummy publishers like EA). Paradox has shown nothing but a willingness to be forthright and dedicated to making the kinds of games EA would never make (see Wester's interview with Angry Joe). Heaven forbid they, I don't know, try to make money now and then (scandalous!). Then again, over the years I've watched this mindless "gimme-video-games-for-free-whaaa" attitude take off, so it's not surprising to me that someone would take one look at a Paradox game Steam page, see the list of DLC, and immediately launch into hysterics without pausing to actually think about the benefits that list of DLC provides to a consumer in a free market economy. Because why act like a responsible consumer when you can instead throw a temper tantrum on the Internet when a company doesn't obsequiously assuage your every irrational complaint?

 

[zAcEz]

Paradox >> Ubisoft + EA

So 2 thumbs up from me.

I do hope that it doesnt change for the worse for decades to come.

 

[Timaeus]

Greetings MechWarriors,

Even in disagreement please remember to post in a civil and respectful manor towards everyone.

Thank you
Timaeus

 

[RAM]

I would not have this (<---) pile of Paradox games unless I thought Paradox was very good at what they do. HBS and Paradox seem like a natural fit, and more Battletech means I'm happy.

Haters gonna hate, I suppose... I'm baffled by the sheer amount of people who intrinsically seem to assume bad faith on the part of Paradox (nevermind that their policies are objectively beneficial to you, the consumer, especially since they are competing in some ways with the big, actually scummy publishers like EA). Paradox has shown nothing but a willingness to be forthright and dedicated to making the kinds of games EA would never make (see Wester's interview with Angry Joe). Heaven forbid they, I don't know, try to make money now and then (scandalous!). Then again, over the years I've watched this mindless "gimme-video-games-for-free-whaaa" attitude take off, so it's not surprising to me that someone would take one look at a Paradox game Steam page, see the list of DLC, and immediately launch into hysterics without pausing to actually think about the benefits that list of DLC provides to a consumer in a free market economy. Because why act like a responsible consumer when you can instead throw a temper tantrum on the Internet when a company doesn't obsequiously assuage your every irrational complaint?

on top of what you stated, what others have stated about them releasing "bug fixes" under DLC costs...that isn't true. Well I can't speak of every game Paradox has ever published and all the DLCs they've released, but at least ,out of those games of theirs I've played, each time there's a DLC, there's an accompanying free patch which includes any bug fixes the DLC also may bring, for no cost whatsoever even if you don't purchase the DLC itself. I assume that's true for all their other games aswell.

I know that being the case for sure in CK2 because while I do own most of it's content DLC (the graphical ones I never bothered with), I don't own them all. couldn't care the less about playing anything on india so that DLC I didn't purchase, yet I did get the free accompanying patch that included all the bugfixes the DLC also included. Same with Stellaris, some of which DLCs I didn't purchase for months after they were relased, yet I got the free patches with bugfixes aswell.

So ...yeah. Let's say I'm on your side about those who think they're entitled to enjoy games for, basically, free. Then again I'm also on the boat of those who felt aggraviated and damaged by the "GamersGate-Gate" and the way they managed that whole thing. Complains about that and decisions to not purchase anything paradox-related based on that experience I do respect and sympathize with. Certainly Paradox is not perfect, that is for sure.

But those who make up excuses for themselves lying about "making money out of bugfixes"...yeah. Those I can't agree with.

 

[Stuckenschmidt]

This is good news. Looking forward to whatever HBS comes up with in the future.

 

[Carl_Bar]

I just bought CK II plus all the DLC in one hit. I'm lucky to be in a position where I can do this. However, I did thing; "Gosh that was expensive."

Then I found out CK2 has been running for 6 years and Paradox have a substantial full-time team on the game. It's released 14 pieces of content in that time and is planning further DLC this year. Just think for a moment how much it costs to have a dedicated team on this game each year? Salaries alone would be substantial.

I can only think of a handful of games that have been supported to this level at any time over the last 20 years. Admittedly CK2 is not graphic intensive so its longevity is therefore not dependent on newish graphics engines.

Really the only thing to critically assess in these 14 DLC’s is the price vs quantity and quality of the DLC. From a number of different sources, the DLC’s have been well rated and received.

Therefore, I do not understand the statements about piecemeal DLC’s that should be free or update and patches that have to be paid for.

This, yeah grabbing all those DLC even with the price reductions on most of them stings the wallet a bit, but eac of the adds a pretty decent sized chunk of content and at the same time tweaks existing mechanics. I'm more familiar with the process from stellaris myself but i can tell you from that, they've put a LOT of time and effort into overhauling an ever increasing list of bits and pieces of the game whilst simultaneously expanding those area's considerably. The result is that in some ways it's almost a different game now, but at the same time it's still recognisably a derivation of the original, in much the same way Civ V and Civ 1 are clearly related products, yet have undergone significant reworkings with each new game. Paradox have done that with Stellaris, except with just a single game and continued long term support. yes to get all the features that came with the overhauls, (as opposed to the basic versions), you need the DLC's, but thats fair enough given these overhauls not only update the functioning of significant game mechanics but expand them in new directions, and it's the new directions stuff our paying for with the DLC, not the core overhaul.

 

[AussieGiant]

This, yeah grabbing all those DLC even with the price reductions on most of them stings the wallet a bit, but eac of the adds a pretty decent sized chunk of content and at the same time tweaks existing mechanics. I'm more familiar with the process from stellaris myself but i can tell you from that, they've put a LOT of time and effort into overhauling an ever increasing list of bits and pieces of the game whilst simultaneously expanding those area's considerably. The result is that in some ways it's almost a different game now, but at the same time it's still recognisably a derivation of the original, in much the same way Civ V and Civ 1 are clearly related products, yet have undergone significant reworkings with each new game. Paradox have done that with Stellaris, except with just a single game and continued long term support. yes to get all the features that came with the overhauls, (as opposed to the basic versions), you need the DLC's, but thats fair enough given these overhauls not only update the functioning of significant game mechanics but expand them in new directions, and it's the new directions stuff our paying for with the DLC, not the core overhaul.

Thanks for the follow up @Carl_Bar

I've pumped 150 hours into CK2. As the game is crazy complex I've probably pumped another 20 hours into watching tutorials and various video's on the various parts of the game.

What I notice is a) I can go back years and years to find content and the game looks and feels completely different. The improvements are also very noticeable. b) If Paradox do what @RAM mentioned, which is release the patch free with the content DLC, then that's exactly what should be done from a fairness point of view.

What I don't know much about is the "GamersGate" issue. It looks like a poorly handled cut over as part of their commercial strategy shift. They are usual brutally difficult to execute because you are managing a series of bad solutions. You end up just trying to select the "least crap" solution and then managing your way through it.

 

[Arch-Heretek]

People defending a corporation as if its your friend is ridiculous.

I've already said it's a mixed bag, but let's go further in depth for the cons associated with PDOX since the fan squad rolled out. I like the games, as shown by looking to the left, but that doesn't mean I approve of how they are sold, marketed, designed, or the corporate strategies behind them, while I'm also lucky enough to be able to afford most of the dlc regardless.

1. Tons of DLC even years after release. This, at first, may sound like a good thing. But each one is between 15-30 dollars and this easily racks up to well over the base game price without even being full-fledged expansions of yore. Then there is the issue CKII has where everything has started to feel stapled on. The game can barely support the weight of everything running at once, doing things they were never designed to do, and you may never get that sequel with a desperately needed new or optimized engine, as has happened with CKII (and no, I don't just mean a graphical upgrade that runs even worse, which brings me to my next point...).

2. When a new game does come along, it's hopelessly barren. This goes for new titles and sequels alike. HOIV could only justify itself in the face of a lower learning curve and graphical fidelity at launch (maybe even now...) and they're still adding in the features that were present in previous games, either in dlc or the base, to it (naval warfare, espionage, etc). Stellaris was fun for a bit but you quickly ran out of things to do, especially in later phases of the game. Then of course there's the whole Sword of The Stars fiasco. Load up CKII without any dlc and look at how much is still "there" but completely inaccessible to the player, ie about half the world. And this funnily brings me back to the dlc thing...

3. DLC completely mutates what the base game is/was. In base CKII you could only play as a feudal Christian. Now you can play as almost anything except clergy. Base Stellaris is completely different now than it was at launch thanks to the aptly named Apocalypse update (which simultaneously brought in new players while hemmoraging a chunk of those that stuck around). HOIV it was only really worth playing the majors as they were the only ones with anything to even *do* or would react semi-appropriately, while naval warfare is still oscillating between being a mess and a different kind of mess.

4. That weird community thing I mentioned. Yea, maybe it's inevitable historical, especially WWII, games drag a lot of junk in the playerbase with them up to and including nazis (even this game did in the Steam forums). What makes it weird is Pdox generally censors them as a sensible... anything... would, and yet hype features almost guarenteed to attract more of them. For example, the last DLC for HOIV was ostensibly for China but included almost as much, if not more, work on Germany (even adding a new feature just for them in the form of MEFO Bills), while even in the base game Germany has the absolute most effort put into it (at one point they deliberately stated they wanted it to be easier to win as Germany than previous titles as well) including the most extensive focus tree, the only real way to start WWII, and the vast majority of flavor events and items to spend political power on. Even superpowers like the US and USSR, each with their own weird fans, are sidelined for Germany.

 

[AussieGiant]

Hi @Arch-Heretek

Thanks for the point of view. I will only talk about CK2 as I don't know enough about the other games to comment.

As you mention the DLC comes at a price. As I mentioned the question is; "Is the price point vs quantity and quality worth it?"

In reality that question will be subjective based on each person's view. Clearly though the game has expanded and there does seem to be substantial increases in the quantity of the game content on each DLC. I'm not sure why that should not be paid for? As mentioned they need to make money to pay the people who made the new content.

I have the current full game and it runs fine on my machine. There are no stability issues or errors from my 150 hours of play.

I've realised that what many people argue is how much of the DLC should be included in the base original game. Clearly day one DLC is ridiculous as the DLC has already been made and the technique is to carve out a part of the base game and put in behind a pay wall that is available within 24 hours of the base game release. Clearly that is poor treatment and I would call it out as such.

By contrast DLC that is released years afterwards clearly was not developed as part of the base game and therefore is being made by people that are being kept employed by taking the success of the base game and developing past that. I can not see how this is inappropriate or somehow exploiting the people who buy the original base game.