Any news about vic3?

[lukesilveira]

Can you stop being so condescending? It's obvious that PDS needs to profit, it's obvious that it sell its DLCs for this reason and its obvious that we as consumers have the choice to buy or not their product - thus rewarding or not Paradox. Does that mean that either us or PDS have some kind of obligation toward each other? Of course not, it would be nonsense to say so. It doesn't even necessarily mean that the lost consumers will diminish PDS profit, maybe new consumers will appear or maybe the new policy will pay its opportunity cost.

I agree with everything mentioned above but it doesn't mean that we can't have an opinion in their policy. If you are fine with it congratulations but there are many that aren't and won't say a thing (this is the vast majority, around 90% to 95% of lost consumers won't ever complain) and there are some that will. But none of the aforementioned reasons forbid us as consumers to disagree to how things are going and talk about it.

Now in my view there is a clearly DLC pattern change after CK2. Some are good, some are not. Retinues in CK2 and Blitz move in HoI4 being a DLC only are IMHO clearly examples of bad game / dlc design. I would like to emphasize that in HoI4 case they are charging for a MOVE - extremely simple little things that IMO should be in the base game.

Again, its obvious that its their games and they may do as they wish, neither party have an obligation toward each other. PDS have its rights to do whatever they want with its own property and we have our rights to buy or not their products. But we also have the right to find (or not) the mentioned examples a bad DLC policy decision and discuss about it, as is happening on this thread.

 

[DesNibelungen]

Can you stop being so condescending?

I'm sorry if I appear condescending. I've just been playing video games since the late 1970s, and the situation is so much better for gamers now, with the games being relatively so much cheaper and so much better, with the ability to continually update and improve them as PDS does -- that it astonishes me that people will still complain about what is, IMO, the best and most player-friendly DLC policy out there. What PDS does with CK2 and EU4 is awesome, with such reasonable prices (people will pay $10-15 to see a 3D IMAX movie but they'll whine about doing the same for something that provides hundreds of hours of entertainment for them), and on top of that, it all goes on sale on Steam 4 times a year, most of it 75% (!!!) off. And people complain! It's amazing to me. And it's particularly ironic that people are complaining about the sales of expansions for V2, which can be had for practically nothing now. I think I paid about $10 for the entirety of V2, and I don't want to know how many hundreds of hours I've sunk into it since then. I got CK2 for FREE because I pre-ordered EU4. I can't understand the complaining...the meme or whatever that content creators should give away their work for nothing and it would all somehow work out for them has surely died a fiery death a thousand times over by now, hasn't it? (rhetorical question)

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

1. You can't compare 70s games to modern games, so much has changed and technology is so much cheaper and better
2. Bro, not all of us can afford tons of DLC. It is not a problem of one being cheap, but of lack of money
3. Vicky is affordable now, especially during sales, due to it being very old compared to other relevant titles. Imagine when Vicky was still being developed, I wouldn't be surprised if it cost like the modern PDS titles today
4. Some DLC are deceptively scumbaggy. For example Purple Phoenix for EU4, it makes Byzantium so much more playable and fun, and since it is one of the most popular nations, they use the opportunity to make cash
http://www.eu4wiki.com/Purple_Phoenix
Just read the events and missions it adds. I have my upmost respect for PDS as their games are of exceptionally high quality, but their DLC policy is bonkers sometimes

 

[CaosRL]

Getting back to the question of this topic, some paradox guy just said in the CK2 dev diary of today that he is working in other game aside from CK2 right now in a suspicious form, Vicki 3 maybe?

 

[zorkman]

I don't see the problems with DLC'S. You either buy them or you don't. I usually buy them after awhile, when they are in a sale & a fraction of the price.

 

[ModZero]

It's really nice that so many people here join me in the want to abolish capitalism and fund Paradox directly from the Central Bureau of Games Development. I really didn't expect that in this forum.

I mean, some DLC/patch feature balance might be better, but calling them scumbaggy for making money so that they have food and make more games is a whee tiny bit over the top. Paradox DLC model proved both relatively okay for users, and effective in making it viable to extensively support games for a long period.

Edit: I accidentally words.

 

[DesNibelungen]

4. Some DLC are deceptively scumbaggy. For example Purple Phoenix for EU4, it makes Byzantium so much more playable and fun, and since it is one of the most popular nations, they use the opportunity to make cashhttp://www.eu4wiki.com/Purple_Phoenix

http://www.eu4wiki.com/Purple_Phoenix

How dare they!

I give up.....


http://www.eu4wiki.com/Purple_Phoenix

 

[Shock360]

Getting back to the question of this topic, some paradox guy just said in the CK2 dev diary of today that he is working in other game aside from CK2 right now in a suspicious form, Vicki 3 maybe?

I saw the same thing and was wondering, but no one said anything in the comments. Maybe he's just working on a game that's already out?

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

I saw the same thing and was wondering, but no one said anything in the comments. Maybe he's just working on a game that's already out?

Stellaris is his other game. As far as i know he is still supervisor for it, just like for CK2.

I'd rather say it's confirmation of Rome II.

 

[Damorte]

Again, easy to say when the game is affordable(Vicky 2). Sadly, when you look at EU4's mountain of DLC, some often being important for gameplay, someone who is not wealthy and can only spare little money will feel saddened and often forced to fork over precious cash to buy it or to settle with a subpar experience in comparison. I am all for supporting companies and paying money for luxury extras(unit and music packs), but I should never be forced to pay extra for a complete experience gameplay-wise if I have low money to begin with.

And how do you propose that Paradox would pay it staff then? You do understand that Paradox is a company that actually have to pay its staff right? Creating new game content is expensive, of course they cant just hand it all out for free - what kind of company would even do that? Your not entitled to any of their work just because you bought a game from paradox a couple of years back, you should just be happy that they even decide to hand some parts of their work off for free.
Also every time there is a new DLC coming out, every old dlc + the base game will go on a big sale bringing down the price to a very reasonable level.

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

And how do you propose that Paradox would pay it staff then? You do understand that Paradox is a company that actually have to pay its staff right? Creating new game content is expensive, of course they cant just hand it all out for free - what kind of company would even do that? Your not entitled to any of their work just because you bought a game from paradox a couple of years back, you should just be happy that they even decide to hand some parts of their work off for free.
Also every time there is a new DLC coming out, every old dlc + the base game will go on a big sale bringing down the price to a very reasonable level.

They already have tons of DLC, making one or two important ones free won't impact their profits, especially since they have numerous games under their belt. If anything, it will increase them, as it will make their players happier and more willing to contribute.I am not calling myself entitled, I am thinking about those that can't afford the money to keep up with the DLC. Sales help, but they are so sporadic that it is hard to save up cash in advance if you live somewhere where you don't save up as much money. The games might be affordable in Sweden or America, but it is not the case everywhere!

 

[ModZero]

They already have tons of DLC, making one or two important ones free won't impact their profits, especially since they have numerous games under their belt. If anything, it will increase them, as it will make their players happier and more willing to contribute.I am not calling myself entitled, I am thinking about those that can't afford the money to keep up with the DLC. Sales help, but they are so sporadic that it is hard to save up cash in advance if you live somewhere where you don't save up as much money. The games might be affordable in Sweden or America, but it is not the case everywhere!

You aren't arguing only with people from "Sweden or America." Saving up until the Steam sales (which are completely predictable) tends to be viable, and games are not a primary, or even a secondary need, so it's not reasonable to demand everyone can get whichever ones they want. And no, Paradox does not in any way "force" you to get the expansions — again, arguing that "they make the game so much better" would only make sense if the game was health care or something.

And yes, I'm aware (and in favour of) the argument that being up to date with cultural content is quite important for quality of life, but (I hope I won't get banned for writing this) Paradox games are not really a part of mainstream culture. There is just no way you could demand guaranteed access to stuff they publish, and you're effectively insulting for people who actually argue about high prices of things they actually need.

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

You aren't arguing only with people from "Sweden or America." Saving up until the Steam sales (which are completely predictable) tends to be viable, and games are not a primary, or even a secondary need, so it's not reasonable to demand everyone can get whichever ones they want. And no, Paradox does not in any way "force" you to get the expansions — again, arguing that "they make the game so much better" would only make sense if the game was health care or something.

And yes, I'm aware (and in favour of) the argument that being up to date with cultural content is quite important for quality of life, but (I hope I won't get banned for writing this) Paradox games are not really a part of mainstream culture. There is just no way you could demand guaranteed access to stuff they publish, and you're effectively insulting for people who actually argue about high prices of things they actually need.

1. I used Sweden and America as an example of countries which people tend to have high income and can easily afford the money to keep up with the game. You can add others there too, these two were most obvious choices.
2. Try living in Serbia, and you will understand why saving up is not exactly doable
3. Healthcare and video games and incomparable. Video games, of course, are not a necessity, but if I pay for the game(and it is a hefty sum), and it ends up incomplete(as it does, otherwise we wouldn't have such DLC), should I really be forced to pay even more to complete it? Those who can't afford are not forced, but they feel forced. Play an incomplete game, that most likely has flaws(that those important DLC fix), or fork over even more money. Again, if you are wealthy, not a problem. But think of the poor people who enjoy the games and wish to support PDS and enjoy them even more! Of course, there is always the option of pirating, but one often feels guilty for doing it, plus it tends to be quite hard to keep up with patches, DLC and such. Also, you are unable to ask for tech support, and also the difficulties of playing MP on a pirated game, plus inability to go for achievements, you get the point. Pirating is not really the best option here.
4. You forget how many DLC are there that are purely cosmetic. Those are a fair way to make cash, as they do not impact the game, they just make it prettier. Kind of like skins in League of Legends, and similar. I am talking about those couple of DLC that make playing without them be aggravating or boring in comparison. There were a couple of examples shown in this thread, find them and you will understand.
To repeat myself, I have my full respect for Paradox and their work, and I wish to support them(and I do, as shown by my icons). Their games are excellent, but their DLC policy needs some work if they want to make themselves more approachable to poorer audiences. I wonder how many people end up not buying the games because of this DLC policy

 

[Shock360]

1. I used Sweden and America as an example of countries which people tend to have high income and can easily afford the money to keep up with the game. You can add others there too, these two were most obvious choices.
2. Try living in Serbia, and you will understand why saving up is not exactly doable
3. Healthcare and video games and incomparable. Video games, of course, are not a necessity, but if I pay for the game(and it is a hefty sum), and it ends up incomplete(as it does, otherwise we wouldn't have such DLC), should I really be forced to pay even more to complete it? Those who can't afford are not forced, but they feel forced. Play an incomplete game, that most likely has flaws(that those important DLC fix), or fork over even more money. Again, if you are wealthy, not a problem. But think of the poor people who enjoy the games and wish to support PDS and enjoy them even more! Of course, there is always the option of pirating, but one often feels guilty for doing it, plus it tends to be quite hard to keep up with patches, DLC and such. Also, you are unable to ask for tech support, and also the difficulties of playing MP on a pirated game, plus inability to go for achievements, you get the point. Pirating is not really the best option here.
4. You forget how many DLC are there that are purely cosmetic. Those are a fair way to make cash, as they do not impact the game, they just make it prettier. Kind of like skins in League of Legends, and similar. I am talking about those couple of DLC that make playing without them be aggravating or boring in comparison. There were a couple of examples shown in this thread, find them and you will understand.
To repeat myself, I have my full respect for Paradox and their work, and I wish to support them(and I do, as shown by my icons). Their games are excellent, but their DLC policy needs some work if they want to make themselves more approachable to poorer audiences. I wonder how many people end up not buying the games because of this DLC policy

So you want them to literally stop doing dlc which adds content? You do realize they would make no money right?

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

So you want them to literally stop doing dlc which adds content? You do realize they would make no money right?

You misunderstood me. I separated Paradox DLC into two types.
Cosmetic DLC: Unit sprite packs, voice packs etc. Doesn't change the gameplay, simply makes the game nicer and prettier
Gameplay influencing DLC: like the name says.
My problem is with the second type

 

[Shock360]

You misunderstood me. I separated Paradox DLC into two types.
Cosmetic DLC: Unit sprite packs, voice packs etc. Doesn't change the gameplay, simply makes the game nicer and prettier
Gameplay influencing DLC: like the name says.
My problem is with the second type

Yes, and I referred to the game play influencing DLC as content. If they didn't sell that they would make no money, and there wouldn't be constant updates. A very slim minority actually buys cosmetic DLC. That's not where their profits come from

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

Yes, and I referred to the game play influencing DLC as content. If they didn't sell that they would make no money, and there wouldn't be constant updates. A very slim minority actually buys cosmetic DLC. That's not where their profits come from

Also, the gameplay DLC can be divided into two pieces.
Those that change the game in an important way(AHD and HOD for Vicky 2)
Those that change the game in a specific way, but otherwise you can live without(Purple Phoenix for EU4, if you aren't a Byzantium fan, you're fine w/o it)

As well, can you show me a statistic on that?

 

[masteriw]

People talk so much about this "paywall" thing but didn't seem to bother when everything was locked by not having DLC. There was no free patch after a new expansion was out. I fail to understand the logic.

 

[TK-XD-M8]

Also, the gameplay DLC can be divided into two pieces.
Those that change the game in an important way(AHD and HOD for Vicky 2)
Those that change the game in a specific way, but otherwise you can live without(Purple Phoenix for EU4, if you aren't a Byzantium fan, you're fine w/o it)

As well, can you show me a statistic on that?

Not a statistic, but as an anecdote, I would be very unlikely to spend money on a cosmetic DLC (and on cosmetic stuff in general, unless it's tf2, but even then). Although, of course, as I said earlier, not a statistic, but an anecdote.

 

[Suzaku]

I'll never understand the argument that a company continuing to support and develop its games via paid DLC (which is the only way such a thing is feasible) is a bad thing. I am happy to pay Paradox to continue to build out games like CK2. They can make it all paid as far as I'm concerned, with no free updates whatsoever.

Because their method has now become accretion design philosophy. What this ends up being mix and match systems where early features get abandoned because they're no longer function and new features have little thought of what interacts with each other.