should Paradox go for a subscription model over a DLC model?

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Preferably, I would like to see updates come without marketing for an other DLC and games to be released in one, single chunk, finished and polished at launch.
And, the arugment of DLC funding updates is NOT legitimate, since one cannot be expected to pay extra for a balanced, finished or fun product
All of CK2's content in one single chunk? God, no. Do you realise how long that would take to make and how much this massive game would cost? There are games that do this. War in the East, Steel Beasts Pro, and other large titles which cost from $80 to well over $200. Are you sure that is what you want?

Not to mention that developing the content "organically" over time allows devs to see what works and what doesn't. That's not the case when you have to do everything in one go.

I have no love for putting fixes and other must-have content behind paywalls (looking at you, convoy routing for HoI4), but I'm fine with buying only the portions I actually care about for a PDX game I buy.
 
False. The DLC policy is a negative with the people that click the thumbs down because they want to click the thumbs down. The sales numbers and profitability of the model disagree with you for CK2, Stellaris, EU4, and HOI4. IR, according to Pdox, sold more units than expected.

Sales have nothing to do with perception or appearance or general consensus. Look at EA. The general gaming fan base will destroy EA on every forum and every comment section mentioning an EA game. But that doesn't stop them from selling millions of copies of their games.

Like the old saying goes, "Image is Everything." Paradox's image is tarnished. I don't think it will stop them selling copies of games or even DLC. For the most part is the only shop in town when it comes to their niche. But players countless ask which DLC to get for their games or what has what features in it. Right now Paradox is asking the gamer to do a bunch of research on their games. Or just add all the DLC 100% for whatever game they are interested in.

If you follow any of the Paradox or Cities content creators you will see questions about DLC and which features are in which one all of the time. Its a gigantic mess. Again I don't think it will hurt sales just Paradox Image and Name.

Honestly do think they need to review their release and DLC policy. If a game is going to be supported for 5+ years its needs a DLC policy that is always convenient for new users. Look at Cities content creators you will get hundreds of comments per video about how they love watching Cities content but don't actually have the game because its overwhelming to look at it on the Steam page.

I haven't played CK2 or EUIV in 3+ years. I am many DLC's behind. I don't know the current rules or even features. And for someone that has been following Paradox for a decade+ it would even be hard for me to jump back in. Just looking at the huge list of DLC and all the change logs makes me not even want to launch to game. At a certain point its great that a game has a long life but then it can sour if a sequel doesn't come out soon enough.

That is just another reason for some kind of complete edition. Whether its $100 or $150. Paradox should look into that model. That way their money is front loaded in the beginning of the life cycle. This probably wouldn't include cosmetic, audio and miscellaneous dlc just the actually gameplay DLC.
 
The industry has drifted away from this because it isn't as profitable as current price models.

Personally, I'd pay a subscription for access to the entire PDX studio with all DLCs. Much easier for a new consumer to subscribe and get to try out everything. Just like we do in so many other modern services.
 
Like the old saying goes, "Image is Everything." Paradox's image is tarnished. I don't think it will stop them selling copies of games or even DLC. For the most part is the only shop in town when it comes to their niche. But players countless ask which DLC to get for their games or what has what features in it. Right now Paradox is asking the gamer to do a bunch of research on their games. Or just add all the DLC 100% for whatever game they are interested in.

The other old saying is "Money doesn't lie". If they make more money this way then no the gamers aren't upset by it.

You'll be happy to know Paradox have listened to the complaints and have added extra information to the country select screen in EU4 listing suggested DLC for each country, as detailed at the bottom of this weeks dev diary

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...lopment-diary-10th-of-september-2019.1242758/
 
Sales have nothing to do with perception or appearance or general consensus. Look at EA. The general gaming fan base will destroy EA on every forum and every comment section mentioning an EA game. But that doesn't stop them from selling millions of copies of their games.

Like the old saying goes, "Image is Everything."
And you're obviously confused about what you feel like their image is, because...

The other old saying is "Money doesn't lie". If they make more money this way then no the gamers aren't upset by it

Just because the loud, vocal minority on the Steam "red thumbs down" crowd might think Paradox's image is bad, the money don't lie. The people that pay the bills are fine with it.
 
Not sure if nearly 10k reviews over 70% negative for the latest game can be called a vocal minority. Especially since it only averages like 600 daily players lower then Victoria 2 numbers.

The minority would most likely be this forum
 
I am a fan of the subscription services that are out but I don't think Paradox has enough games to make it worth it. Be better off making the games available on Game pass or Origin Premier.
 
I'd say I consider myself a rather casual gamer and have never found a ton of DLCs to be intimidating when buying a new game because I can easily just research and see what the big selling points for an expansion [are they still called that?] are... but I don't know.
 
What on earth should be the advantage of a subscription. Now everyone gets content updates roughly 4 times a year for an initial purchase. The initial price after a year is roughly 15 eur so 15 eur for yrs of content... That's a fing bargain. A subscription would mean I will stop playing cause I can't afford even 5 euros a month.
 
Paradox calls it DLC - DownLoadable Content

Think the difference/definition is that for DLCs, they should be freestanding and possible to freely mix as you want as customer while an expansion can be a requirement for next expansion.
I think it's just about size. Back when everything was physical, they were expansion packs because they were a major expansion, and they had to be to justify them. With everything downloadable now, games can have smaller packs (like "stuff packs" for the Sims), or music or portrait packs like CK2 has. The smaller stuff clearly aren't expansion packs, and it's easier to just call everything DLC now (because it all, technically, is).
 
Gamers will complain about withheld or forcefully introduced features regardless of any approach made. Gamers complain a lot.

The way I play Paradox games is in surges at random points throughout the year. I get an itch that other games can't solve and I binge on Paradox, then move back to other things. As such a subscription wouldn't work for me. DLCs allow me to decide how interested I am in a game or how much I want to reward Paradox.

Don't you just prove the point?
I play paradox games in the exact same way you described, when I pick up a title again like EU4 then I don't want to buy 5 major expansions before starting, or wait for a sale to buy them before I can begin.
 
Don't you just prove the point?
I play paradox games in the exact same way you described, when I pick up a title again like EU4 then I don't want to buy 5 major expansions before starting, or wait for a sale to buy them before I can begin.

Wow thread necro.

But would you pay for a subscription for all the months you're not playing?

I'm guessing your view is you would only pay for a subscription the few months of the year where you do pay and cancel the subscription at all other times. Therefore Paradox would get much less money out of you than they do under the current system. Bad for them, good for us … until Paradox go out of business.
 
Wow thread necro.

But would you pay for a subscription for all the months you're not playing?

I'm guessing your view is you would only pay for a subscription the few months of the year where you do pay and cancel the subscription at all other times. Therefore Paradox would get much less money out of you than they do under the current system. Bad for them, good for us … until Paradox go out of business.

Ignoring your humorous hypothesis. Of course, what is there to argue about?
 
just bundle the games + previous dlc for $40, latest DLC for $20. They get full price for all the longtime players, and new players can catch up for a reasonable price. Price of a movie in a theatre and the price of the movie from the rental shop are different; price changes also on WHEN you receive the item.

Plus the free patches generally screw up the game if played without the accompanying DLC.
 
I mean the price already goes down based on how old the dlc is, (you won’t get much, if any off for the latest dlc, older dlc’s you’ll get 50% or more off) but this only really applies to sales. More bundles wouldn’t be terrible though.

The dlc model isn’t really that different from expansions at the end of the day besides being less iterative (don’t need one to get the next), so it’s not too bad, and if it helps Paradox make stable money than all the better. Plus, as others have said, the free patch support is great even if you don’t buy the dlc’s.

And it always feels better to own than have to pay for a continual subscription you may or may not use. Especially if you someday want to dust off and play an old game.
 
I mean the price already goes down based on how old the dlc is, (you won’t get much, if any off for the latest dlc, older dlc’s you’ll get 50% or more off) but this only really applies to sales. More bundles wouldn’t be terrible though.

The dlc model isn’t really that different from expansions at the end of the day besides being less iterative (don’t need one to get the next), so it’s not too bad, and if it helps Paradox make stable money than all the better. Plus, as others have said, the free patch support is great even if you don’t buy the dlc’s.

And it always feels better to own than have to pay for a continual subscription you may or may not use. Especially if you someday want to dust off and play an old game.
I think that Having all dlcs > having 9/10 dlcs especially if you're a infrequent player and '' .. want to dust off and play an old game''. Sub model is great for casuals, newbies and returning players.