If I think about the fact that each of the DLC costs less than a visit at the cinema I must disagree to that statement.
Are DLC's worth it?
- Thread starter pirro
- Start date
-
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.
well, by that logic, I should just buy every single game in existence
Putting aside the fact that "fun time" an entirely subjective value, if you think WtT isn't worth it, I have wonder just where your expectations are exactly.
My "policy" with DLCs is to buy them if they are relevant to my interests. As a Norwegian, I made sure to buy the Old Gods expansion for CK2 pretty much right after I bought the game, for example.
So if playing as India/Raj interests you, for example, by all means go for it
.
So if playing as India/Raj interests you, for example, by all means go for it
.
Buy every DLCs so that Paradox will have more money to fix all the bugs in the game.
My "policy" with DLCs is to buy them if they are relevant to my interests. As a Norwegian, I made sure to buy the Old Gods expansion for CK2 pretty much right after I bought the game, for example.
So if playing as India/Raj interests you, for example, by all means go for it
Generally agreed, but I'll add a caveat.
I ended up getting the DLCs because I fell for this game in a way I never did with HOI3 and wanted the 'full experience'. Ordinarily I wouldn't touch something like the Raj, but seeing how I went and bought them I decided to give some of the DLC nations a shot. Now some are better than others of course, but I've been very impressed with the fun I've had with the likes of South Africa, Australia, the Raj, Hungary, etc. On that note, I'm not normally a day 1 purchase type, but I will for WtT.
Only if you otherwise would watch every movie in existence.
/edit: Or let me say it in other words: If I had 15€ to spare on entertainment and had to choose between a game and a movie at the cinema the game would win.
/edit2: Maybe your choice would be different but in that case the reasoning would not be "money spent per time of entertainment".
Last edited:
I use the reasoning that even if the DLCs don't contain content that I really want (I own TfV but haven't even tried most of the Commonwealth-countries yet), buying them is an investment in the continued development of the game, increasing the chance that content that I would love to get (Nordic DLC, Barbarossa-focused DLC, fuel) are more likely to be implemented in the future. Having said that, I'm not willing to dish out money for just anything: I never bought Sunset Invasion for CK 2, for instance, and if the formable nations and other alt-history stuff like the NF-trees would all be in a single DLC, odds are good I would probably not buy it.
That depends on how good the movie is though. I'd probably pick the dlc if I had to, since I don't really like blockbusters, but meeh.
I am sorry, I came here for world war 2. Not world war 1 episode 2. If I wanted that, then there is a mod called kaiserreich which is completely free and does it better anyways. I am at the moment against getting another dlc (although I will get WtT for free anyways
/)) but my opinion is derived from experience. I don't mind paying for new features and developing of the game itself, but the addition of the latest dlcs were hardly meaningful in any major sense and would rather have payed money for bug fixing that new mechanics that are unbalanced and/or breaks the game even more. I am not against paying, and I am not saying I won't enjoy the dlc to some degree, but I don't think its worth it in the sense that I felt it was worth it. I am not against people buying it if they want to, but I would have prefered polishing and more fundamental changes to the game rather that alternative stories. The new features look a bit cool, but that is about it. I had more fun per dollar payed with the base game + mods + MP than I will in vanilla with these new features in any setting because vanilla is so extremely lacking from a competitive point of view because it is so broken and unbalanced.That said, if you like just lolling around in SP for a while and dissect the new dlcs future just for kicks and giggles, maybe you will find some enjoyment making your own fantasy empire, but what does it have to do with world war 2?
Last edited:
If you are playing a paradox game, it is nonsensical to not get the DLC.
Various content packs later in the dev cycle not withstanding.
While TfV and DoD do not offer the same amount of content that we are going to see in WtT, but they both flush out belligerents of the war. And to me, that seems essential...given I am playing a WW2 GSG.
If cost is a barrier wait till WtT and the older DLC may be on discount.
If you dont have the DLCs, im just going to assume you play primarily SP. In SP the aggressor nations are SO MUCH more fun. Fighting a defensive war is boring. Paradox has acknowledged that and said it is on their radar. As such, DoD would appear to be more interesting. Czech, Romania, Yugo and Hungary were all right there in the war. Where was New Zealand?
Spearhead and new battleplanner tactic is included in TfV.
DoD has bigger NF trees than TfV.
As the game stands currently, if you are a new player DoD and TfV countries would be the ones I'd be suggesting for your first playthough.
Various content packs later in the dev cycle not withstanding.
While TfV and DoD do not offer the same amount of content that we are going to see in WtT, but they both flush out belligerents of the war. And to me, that seems essential...given I am playing a WW2 GSG.
If cost is a barrier wait till WtT and the older DLC may be on discount.
If you dont have the DLCs, im just going to assume you play primarily SP. In SP the aggressor nations are SO MUCH more fun. Fighting a defensive war is boring. Paradox has acknowledged that and said it is on their radar. As such, DoD would appear to be more interesting. Czech, Romania, Yugo and Hungary were all right there in the war. Where was New Zealand?
Spearhead and new battleplanner tactic is included in TfV.
DoD has bigger NF trees than TfV.
As the game stands currently, if you are a new player DoD and TfV countries would be the ones I'd be suggesting for your first playthough.
That is all fine and dandy, I will not argue against your dlc policy because it's all literally your opinion, and thus all discussion is rendered moot.That depends on how good the movie is though. I'd probably pick the dlc if I had to, since I don't really like blockbusters, but meeh.
I am sorry, I came here for world war 2. Not world war 1 episode 2. If I wanted that, then there is a mod called kaiserreich which is completely free and does it better anyways. I am at the moment against getting another dlc (although I will get WtT for free anyways
That said, if you like just lolling around in SP for a while and dissect the new dlcs future just for kicks and giggles, maybe you will find some enjoyment making your own fantasy empire, but what does it have to do with world war 2?
About your "WW1 episode 2" argument though, I don't know where you got the idea that this is the focus of the dlc, it isn't called "the return of the kaiser" after all.
WTT will give a major overhaul to the second largest theatre of the war, something that was severely lacking in the base game.
All this said and done, none of it address my post, which was about expectations.
It's been a long, long time since I've seen PDX release an expansion+patch with this much content, so if you don't think this isn't worth it, I don't know what would be.
Yes, both DLCs widen and deepen the game. As well, I treat Paradox DLCs as a tip to the company that makes the games I love. Even if some are a bit odd and I keep them permanently turned off (CK2 Sunset Invasion, need I say more?), it helps keeps the games fresher for longer than your usual EA tripe. I know this is controversial, but I think Paradox games would really suit a subscription model.
New Zealand was in the Solomons, Crete, Alamein, Monte Casino, etc., etc.
Actually, this is a pretty nice idea.
But maybe going for a mixed approach would be best.
I fear going 100% subscription would scare potential newcomers away as much as the dreaded dlc paywall system we already have.
HoI4 is still pretty early in its cycle, but I can already see the same ridiculous situation from CK2 and EU4 creeping up little by little, something clearly needs to change.
Buying the base game or the base game+some old dlcs, while having the other dlcs on the subscription (on a fixed price, not on a per dlcs basis) would be my idea.
100% worth it. The number of hours played divided by the cost is a no brainer. Just playing through the new minor trees gives new life to the game.
If you only want to play the major countries like UK, France, Germany, USSR, USA, and Italy, and are not very interested in minor countries, then I would say NO, the DLC is not that great.
If you like playing minors that are included in the DLC, then yes.
You can look up the list of paid features here: https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Downloadable_content
If you like playing minors that are included in the DLC, then yes.
You can look up the list of paid features here: https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Downloadable_content
@HappyOdin of course, I didn’t mean to suggest they didn’t fight. My point is, fighting a defensive war (especially from an island in the Pacific which has horribly underdeveloped mechanics and systems wise) isn’t as interesting as gong a nearly historical Fascist Romania and making gymnastics the national sport of everywhere.
That said, personally I prefer the nations in TfV—especially Raj, it like the only country I played MP as and enjoyed.
That said, personally I prefer the nations in TfV—especially Raj, it like the only country I played MP as and enjoyed.