• 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.
But the base game already exists. I don't see an issue this late in the development cycle. If it were a new game sure I'd be entirely against the idea.
Oh yeah for sure. Can't let them know about in advance though, which is essentially impossible.
I am just theorizing here as to why a subscription appeals to Paradox. Could it be that there is a desire for profit margins to see a steady stable income stream that subscriptions provide, rather than the ups and downs of purchases of base game and dlc which depend on releases in a given quarter? I am starting to think this has more to do with shareholders being happy than simply trying to provide a service to newcomers. Don't want to be cynical or jaded, but the more I think about it the more this seems to make sense.
It's exactly this, of course. The profit-motive is the only reason companies do anything.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
There are also two questions:
1. How much? 5$? Not great, not terrible. 20$? You know i can get a full game for that amount, dont you?
2. What is in the box? Will eu4 include 2 expansion each year? Will there be other games like CK2 or stellaris or poor imperator?
If i sub for ue4 it is not like i am playing ck2, who has time for that, but having an option to play some other game included in package would be an asset.

EDIT: it seems it is just EU4 and nothing more. I have doubts if you can pump enought quality content in one game. Maybe stack subscription months for discount on bid buy if you like the game?
 
Last edited:
Going to skip most of the thread just to get my two cents in. I agree with Paradox that it would be a good idea to reduce the barrier to entry for new players, but the subscription model idea frankly scares me -- it reminds me of Fallout 76 more than anything. How would you even police it for a single-player game anyway, wouldn't it take dev resources just to implement it in a non-exploitable way?

I know it's not aimed at older players, but honestly I'd rather contribute monthly to a random Paradox dev's Patreon account, rather than pay a subscription fee where I don't know what my money's going towards (i.e. when's the next DLC coming out, what are the patch notes really? no blindsiding players with territory corruption shenanigans)

Also, how come the base game can't be considered an effective "trial" version? It usually comes on very cheap compared to the rest of the DLC, and it was very effective at pulling me into the game back in 2017. I've been buying every DLC that comes out full-price since then, even if the only changes that interest me are in the free patch (specifically to support the development time that went into making them).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
There should be no subscription model. Rather, paradox ought to bundle the older packs/expansions together and sell them as a discounted bundle.

There you go, do this. Forgive my English, but F off with subscription MMO bull.... I hate being impolite, but this is a good old slap in the face.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
There you go, do this. Forgive my English, but F off with subscription MMO bull.... I hate being impolite, but this is a good old slap in the face.

Why is it a slap in your face to offer you access to ALL dlc for X money per month?

Is it somehow worse than insisting on you paying for them all first?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Why is it a slap in your face to offer you access to ALL dlc for X money per month?
It's a bit of a slap to ask for money for DLC that is six years old and has been iterated and changed with various patches over the years that it's really not worth the price tag that is still being charged for it...

Is it somehow worse than insisting on you paying for them all first?

Also, the whole "renting" DLC thing, yet never truly owning it. To me, that's fine for base games themselves; but subscriptions to access optional extras (although let's be fair, with the amount of features that the DLC has added to the game over the years, most of the playerbase would reclass it as necessary DLC) is still a bit of a pill to swallow.

The X money a month being 18 zloty (so I'm going to guess it's always going to be a localised equivalent of €5) still feels a little much though for not the greatest amount of content; at least while Xbox Game Pass is still €4/month.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Subscription models make sense for games that receive a constant stream of updates which, let's be honest, isn't really happening with EUIV. I don't have all the DLC and really can't afford it (I rely on my wealthier friends hosting full dlc games). A subscription model would be tempting, but subscribers are probably going to expect a constant stream of pay to be matched with a more or less constant stream of updates, not year-long waits between content updates.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Why is it a slap in your face to offer you access to ALL dlc for X money per month?

Is it somehow worse than insisting on you paying for them all first?

Because instead of adressing the issues of the bad policy PDX has regarding DLC's (and many more issues as well) you pretend to conduct expreriments on users to test what is the limit of your loyal consumer's patience with predatory monetization schemes.

It's a bit of a slap to ask for money for DLC that is six years old and has been iterated and changed with various patches over the years that it's really not worth the price tag that is still being charged for it...

And marketing department should know about this, and not treat their products like the last Battle Royale of the month

Subscription models make sense for games that receive a constant stream of updates which, let's be honest, isn't really happening with EUIV

It's a bad time to try to be pricing this model. You haven't released a major expansion since september 2018, or any paid content since december 2018, and so if we evaluate the yearly cost based on this release schedule, I think a fair price is $0.00 :p You can't evaluate a fair price for this stuff until the development team gets things under control and knows how often *roughly* it will be able to release full expansions. One every 2 years? You can maybe charge $10 a year, at which point the subscription model really isn't even worth considering.

Basically what people have been telling you this whole thread and you are deciding to ignore.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Please remember that what we are doing right now is a test.

Some people have been requesting a statement on our plan for this, but there is none. Our plan is to run this test and see how it works out before thinking what this could mean for the future.

This thread is also getting a bit too long and things are starting to go in circles a bit, so please prioritize using agree and disagree on previous posts rather than repeating what has already been said. This way your feedback will be much easier to process. Thank you!

And as always. We appreciate your passion for this 7 year old game, it's invaluable to us. But please try to keep a constructive tone, thank you!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Also adding my point of view:

1) Subscription is fine if there are regular updates. There are none so far. Would that change with subscription?
2) If I would consider subscription of say 4$ - 12$, I am also considering WOW, Netflix, Xbox live and other services providing entertainment. Why? Because it is a monthly cost and i can only have limited amount of them and lately there is too many. Comparing subscription to only EU4 for 5$ with Xbox live ... well not worth EU4 is just one game. Same goes comparison with Netflix, tons of movies ... only one game.
3) How would the subscription work with internet access. Would internet access be neccesary to play with subscribtion?

Main point, if it is meant only for EU4, then no. For whole Paradox library? Yep, sign me up for 12$ a month. (I would still love option to buy the games, after all they are single player.)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
As long as they let the choice to keep paying DLC with the standard system, I don't care of the susbcription model.

the world is full of whales, they can easily get money from them with that.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't typically chime in on the forums (Mostly because of an initial bad choice for a forum name), but I want to express my support for Paradox. I love your games, I love watching your twitch content. It's nice to be able to put a face to the people making the games I enjoy, which is not a common thing in the gaming industry.

Regarding your monetization, personally I have no problem with your current DLC policy and gladly purchase the majority of them. The only issue I have is one I am sure you are aware of, which is the barrier of entry to some of your games, EU4 especially. I would like to get some of my friends playing, but I don't want to put them in a position of spending a large amount of money into the game just to not enjoy it. I am supportive of ideas to alleviate this problem.

As far as the level of hyperbolic, ridiculous outrage being expressed in this thread by some posters, I am sorry to see it. It is disheartening to read comments basically accusing Paradox of being some sort of corporate parasite trying to leech as much money from their player base as possible. While agree that the majority of "triple A" game developers sadly fit this bill, I don't see it with Paradox.

So, for as much as it matters, carry on with your experiment and I hope you arrive at a solution that works for the majority of people as well brings in new players to EU4.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I get that its real internet cool to "stick it to the man", but really? It is more "predatory" to be able to jump in for $10 for a month with access to all the DLC, than to pay 10-20 times that amount to even be able to try out the game? The model that Paradox is suggesting is specifically to help new players, not make it more expensive. As they have shouted from the mountaintops (for deaf ears apparently), you can still buy the game and DLC if you figure you will spend enough time with the game for it to be worth it. You are basically getting more choice in how you pay for the game - how exactly is that worse than now?

You're thinking in Terms of an MMO. Something you're meant to spend multiple months on, play with friends, and enjoy the grind that pads out the time, with the 'DLC/Expansions' being very massive with weeks of content for a more casual player. But a Single Player game is NOT like that. There are games I play reinstall and play for a day once or twice every few months for years. If it was a Subscription based, I'd have to fork over $10 or $15 every few months, just to play the game for a few days, then I stop playing and the rest of the days are wasted. After 4-6 times of that happening, it would have been more profitable to just buy the game full price. And that's just a semi casual gamer for older games. What about a gaming addict that plays for a full year straight? giving $120 to $180 a year, for a single player game. Why waste that money on a single game playing with themselves when they can get a MMO Sub for that and play with their friends?

As for the Arguement of it being to get new players, you get that by making the DLCs cheaper, AND worth buying as well. It's the Number 1 turn off from most of the Paradox games like Stallaris, CK2, and EU4. It's too expencive! So make it LESS expensive, not more expensive over a longer period of time! It's common sense to not screwing over the consumer.

They sell the DLC for the price they need to charge to fund its development, plus bank enough money to fund a sequel or other projects the company works on. If they thought that cutting the price to 10% of what it is now would get them 10 times the playerbase, they probably would. However, for relatively niche games such as CK2, EU4 etc., the price is high because the audience is limited. Go take a look at Slitherine to see how much you have to fork out for modernized versions of wargames from the age of DOS. If you go look at the FTP mega-games such as Fortnite and Apex, they can monetize their players very little because there is a ton of them - the audience for FPS games is enormous.

I can only assume you don't play many video games, don't go outside very often, and don't interact with many people online when you come up with these kinda logistics and can't understand the issues. What in my older post about there being FREE Mods, that do what the DLC does but BETTER do you not understand about that the Development of these 'Official' DLC must be messed up! Either they are doing very little work, and thus it isn't worth what they are asking. Or they are spending so much money and doing so much hard work on such basic concepts, that the company should fire them for wasting money and time and hire actual Devs that know how to code and can code faster, better, and cheaper! There are free games that update with much more content than what a DLC from Paradox is likely to have.

Have to actually PLAYED some of the other Paradox Games and SEEN what their DLC's have to offer? One of the EU4 DLCs had a great negative review, pointing out that the $20 DLC just offered 5 buttons, 3 for non Indians and 2 for Indians. And that was ALL it offered. Another DLC just made you click a new button every 6+ months in game for a free passive buff, in another $20 DLC. Those are thing you expect in a early access game that's in Beta and still adding a feature or two to reach a completed state. And you only have to buy the base game for $20-$40 for ALL those updates, and not a $20 DLCs for each new button!

I'm not just talking shit, you can GO TO STEAM and actually LOOK at Paradox Games and their DLCs! Or did you not actually research the games you were buying, and just bought them full price without actually knowing what you were buying? Did you just blindly go "Oh, a brand new DLC" and bought it instantly without actually reading what it actually had in it? I'm not talking 10 or 15 angry people, most of the Major DLCs for the games have 250-500 Reviews, and 90% of the DLCs for ALL of Paradox Strategy Games are Mixed or Mostly Negative! This isn't 'Sticking it to the Man', this is actually having common sense of not wasting hard earn money on something not worth it, and many people agreeing!

----

As for 'Looking at F2P games', all those games you listed are Multiplayer Only, don't have DLC/Expansions, and you can't buy the games. They are 100% FREE to do EVERYTHING without a Subscription at all! The only thing you 'Pay' for, are useless Cosmetic stuff that has no barings on the game itself! It's a much better system than a Subscription! Why do you think the only 2 games you see with a Subscription now is Black Desert, which is heavily Pay to Win, all about massive grinding or spending hundreds and thousands of dollars to skip some of it, and WoW, which also lets you play the first 20 levels free in it's own Sudo F2P model.

If every EU4 player decided that they would only pay $2 for the DLC they make now, they would not make better DLC - they would stop making it entirely. It would simply not make economical sense. All the rage and indignity in this thread will not change that basic fact.

Hmm. You are correct... But that wouldn't be Worse. It wouldn't be better either as we wouldn't get a much official content. But as I pointed out, there are free mods that do BETTER than the actual DLCs. So we wouldn't actually LOSING anything, other than more ways to lose money. It would actually be a Win for us, as then we could spend the $150 to $300 on buying other games, or maybe on food, or on other Paradox games. It would be much better than Paradox having us Sub for EACH new game, draining $10+ PER game of theirs, which we might even be playing at the same time.

No, the only way I can see a Subscription working, is if it was a $15 'Paradox' Subscription, that allowed access to ALL their Games and DLCs. Not just a $10 sub for EU4, then another $10 Sub for CK2 and so on. And even THEN, it should be a system where it 'Saves' the Money you spend per month on the Sub, and can buy their games with that. So if you Sub $15 for 4 months, that's $60 you should be able to spend to actually BUY and OWN a $60 game. So if the Sub runs out, you can still access and own that game at least.

THAT would be a much better Sub system, and more fair.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Regarding your monetization, personally I have no problem with your current DLC policy and gladly purchase the majority of them. The only issue I have is one I am sure you are aware of, which is the barrier of entry to some of your games, EU4 especially. I would like to get some of my friends playing, but I don't want to put them in a position of spending a large amount of money into the game just to not enjoy it. I am supportive of ideas to alleviate this problem.

As far as the level of hyperbolic, ridiculous outrage being expressed in this thread by some posters, I am sorry to see it. It is disheartening to read comments basically accusing Paradox of being some sort of corporate parasite trying to leech as much money from their player base as possible. While agree that the majority of "triple A" game developers sadly fit this bill, I don't see it with Paradox.

So, for as much as it matters, carry on with your experiment and I hope you arrive at a solution that works for the majority of people as well brings in new players to EU4.
And how do you talk when you can't play with friends "without problems"in the form of OOS \ localization problems ( this is a shame, mods fix it, and the company itself can't. Just a shame).And for MP need for high-quality Internet.

PS And the message above, generally should be in a frame ! Very well said.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
There is a constant release of "5 button" add-ons, while the problems that have been going on since the release of the game have not been fixed. And for a reason, people who play MP, the game is called "LOBBY SIM".
In this case, the NECESSARY functionality, which has already been written about many times. Never showed up:
1)HJ (It doesn't work as it should)
2)PING check
3)stand alone server
4) function "kick player" You can also be surprised, but it also doesn't work as it should.
5)anti-cheat
Bug fixes from the release:
1)Ghost players
2)OOS ( when use translate mode)
3)crash sometimes for no reason
4)Unable to start the game if someone crashes while loading
5)the loss of chat
6)AND HOW MUCH CAN WE NOW PERMANENTLY RESTART THE GAME WHEN CHANGING THE GAME MODE (SP \ MP) OR WHEN LEAVING THE LOBBY (OR THE MULTIPLAYER MENU)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Interesting idea but I will skip it.
Like other users said, without constant updates it's really not worth it.
Especially when the Nations, and Regions I play are ignored as they are.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
so a from a post on reddit the user posted an image and it cost 17.99 pln which converts to $4.26 a month. That is $51.12 a year. So lets say paradox is able to put out 2 major expansions a year at the cost of $20, this adds up to $40 (this is not even counting the quality of the dlc). And even with paying $51.12 a year u dont even own the dlc. Very nice. "bUt It WiLl nEvEr Be ThE oNlY oPtIoN" yeah ok publicly trading company that just wants to make money. So paradox what ur saying is it will never ever be the only option no matter what even if it has way more profitability than the current model. No amount of kool aid/PR will convince me that u won't eventually make this the only option. You guys say u want to help the consumer get into the game but they will eventually pay more than the dlcs especially if they like the game. People have given u decent how ideas on how to remedy this without a subscription service. If u look at my post page 11 it explains all this i think quite well.

If ur so confident make a public statement saying it will never be the only option/exclusive because I have zero confidence that in future games it wont be the only option/exclusive. Especially since u guys tried to make a unit model exclusive only to retract it because of pushback.

Also lets not forget the BS pay2win mobile game. Your right actions do speaker louder than words.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Been following this thread for the past two days, but haven't had time to post yet. Don't want to be redundant, so I'll keep this fairly short. Overall, I am cautiously optimistic about this idea. As long as it is not the only way to play the game, I think a subscription could be viable. At this point, further speculation seems to be unprofitable, as it inevitably revolves around what we think or assume Paradox will do in the future. I say we watch their experiment, wait for more concrete details, then make up our minds. That said, I do have a few questions of my own:
  • Does this mean that the base game will eventually become free, as happened with CKII?
  • How will this potentially affect the modding community? Will subscription players still be able to use mods?
  • Will we potentially see a GOG/no DRM version in the future, as happened with Imperator?
 
  • 1
Reactions: