Boycott Paradox interactive games!

[Swami]

Why should he? You can see how the fanboys rally behind him and change the topic as often as they can. But the very fact that instead of discussing the issue or ignoring it, tthey choose to go this rout, should tell you much about the real reasons behind this.

Again I agree with you about the DLC issue. A oldskool expansion pack with everything included (also the extra povinces form Art of War free patch) would probably sell good and bring in enough money. So I do hate the whole DLC system.

But.... within the hatefull system Paradox is in my opinion not the worst, actually they have pretty honest DLC strategy, they also give lot's of free patches and stuff... So what I'm trying to say is that I rather see DLC's banished everywhere, but if they do have to stay I would like that other companies would do their DLC's more like Paradox

Still hate the concept though...

 

[Phönix]

And what exactly is this principle?

I'll reiterate: the complaint, so far as I understand it, can be summed up thusly "no dlc->building cap".
Which can be modded. And which you and I don't know the majority of vanilla players would want.

The fact that it can be modded is not an argument. My ability to mod should not factor in this calculation. If it was a toogle in the options menue, with a CLEAR note that said that the developement cap could effectively only be raised with a dlc, then it would be a different matter. But its not.

 

[Wizzington]

I still don't understand the logic behind the development-building link being behind a paywall, and unfortunately wiz, instead of giving some valid reason, you hide behind "but it actually isn't of any importance, why do you bother?". Well, some people are bothered, and though we understand this is a company, and you are not obliged to discuss your decisions with us, it would be nice if you gave us the reasoning for this decision, instead of trying to dodge the initial argument with comments like that.

Because the only way to not do that would be to make development free, and I don't buy the argument that being able to increase building slots (which is just a secondary effect of development in the first place) is so incredibly crucial that it absolutely needs to be free. I can think of far more important things that are 'behind a paywall', because ultimately we are a business and unless we can charge money for expansions we won't have any money to pay for continued development.

 

[Phibs]

Again I agree with you about the DLC issue. A oldskool expansion pack with everything included (also the extra povinces form Art of War free patch) would probably sell good and bring in enough money. So I do hate the whole DLC system.
But.... within the hatefull system Paradox is in my opinion not the worst, actually they have pretty honest DLC strategy, they also give lot's of free patches and stuff... So what I'm trying to say is that I rather see DLC's banished everywhere, but if they do have to stay I would like that other companies would do their DLC's more like Paradox
Still hate the concept though...

An oldskool expansion would also take far longer to produce. Personally I enjoy the higher frequency of content.

The fact that it can be modded is not an argument. My ability to mod should not factor in this calculation. If it was a toogle in the options menue, with a CLEAR note that said that the developement cap could effectively only be raised with a dlc, then it would be a different matter. But its not.

They can hardly add toggles whenever they change the game balance. That's simply not realistic.
You don't like the new balance. Others have already stated that they do.
If you wish to deviate from the status quo vanilla, you mod. I don't like the changes they did to Catholicism (I do, just an example).
That doesn't mean I'm entitled to a toggle granting me access to the old mechanics.

 

[kontinos]

As far as I know, some players that go for World Conquest achievement deliberately turn off Common Sense DLC, as the AI developing provinces increases the coring costs and overextension value of those provinces, which slows down WC whenever coring costs or OE is the bottleneck. So for this specific DLC the argument of Pay2Win is a bit weak.

In my current Muscovy WC attempt I noticed to my dismay that as I conquered more and more of East Asia and integrated more and more vassals there, the trade of my new provinces started flowing straigth towards the coffers of my enemies. And with only 2 merchants I was unable to stop that. I had 5 large colonial nations but without El Dorado DLC those give no bonus merchants. Also as I am still Eastern tech (no free westernization in 1.11) I could not make Trade Companies either. So I bought and activated El Dorado mid WC attempt, and thanks to the 5 bonus merchants my trade income went up from 37 to 100 ducats/month (leading to 500 total income) and of course the income of my enemies dropped as well, although those with large colonial empires would of course also get additional merchants.

I originally skipped buying El Dorado because I was not interested in custom nations and wasn't playing Meso American natives. But the bonus merchants from colonial nations made buying El Dorado rather compelling in my specific case.

There is no Pay2Win argument.
The rest of your post, it only strengthens the point of the topic maker. Something new added feature should be in the DLC, and if you want it, you buy it. If you don't, you just play the original game and that's it, but still get bugfixes and achievements.
Phoenix: I don't support the boycott and certainly can't judge someone on assumptions, so i am not here to judge wiz and paradox on my imaginative intention of theirs, i am just asking for an honest answer.

 

[Phönix]

Again I agree with you about the DLC issue. A oldskool expansion pack with everything included (also the extra povinces form Art of War free patch) would probably sell good and bring in enough money. So I do hate the whole DLC system.

But.... within the hatefull system Paradox is in my opinion not the worst, actually they have pretty honest DLC strategy, they also give lot's of free patches and stuff... So what I'm trying to say is that I rather see DLC's banished everywhere, but if they do have to stay I would like that other companies would do their DLC's more like Paradox

Still hate the concept though...

That I can agree with, to some degree. And yes maybe the problem is that I am someone who started gaming in the late 90s, when a game was a game and an expansion an expansion. But it sill does not change that paradox too have dipped into it. The fact that all others are doing it does not change enough.

 

[HabemusZlatan]

Why take this so seriously to begin with?
I mean, I've stopped playing CK2 because it has started to bore me, all I did was just stop playing it and not buying DLCs. Guess what, I didn't feel the need to write a long explanation why a game I don't like is inherently evil.

You should try that too.

 

[Phönix]

Because the only way to not do that would be to make development free, and I don't buy the argument that being able to increase building slots (which is just a secondary effect of development in the first place) is so incredibly crucial that it absolutely needs to be free. I can think of far more important things that are 'behind a paywall', because ultimately we are a business and unless we can charge money for expansions we won't have any money to pay for continued development.

Who EVER said you should not charge for expansion? I have bought many of your expansions btw, not as many as some, but more then many. I have never had a problem with that. Not even with essentially selling bugfixes for Hoi3. (Look at my comments if you doubt me, I defended paradox in that situation).

But thats not what this is about. You changed a core element of somehting I had already payed for and want me to pay you again to make it work the way you think is the right way. (If you dont think its part of the new machanic, then you would not sell it as a dlc).

If you change a core mechanic that was part of the game, then you should release the whole thing, not parts that you use for essentially advertising the expansion. That is bad business practices. THat is EA/activision territory.

IF YOU HAD NOT RELEASED THE PATCH FOR FREE AT ALL, I WOULD NOT HAVE HAD A PROBLEM! So dont play the we need money to make expansions card.

 

[Phönix]

Phoenix: I don't support the boycott and certainly can't judge someone on assumptions, so i am not here to judge wiz and paradox on my imaginative intention of theirs, i am just asking for an honest answer.

I can respect that. For me its clear why they did it, since they are not a small indi company that started out yesterday, but if you have doubts, thats valid for me.

 

[Swami]

An oldskool expansion would also take far longer to produce. Personally I enjoy the higher frequency of content.

I actually don't care about that that much... I find it rather annyoing to have new patches the whole time while I'm in the middle of a game Just play the game till you're tired of it and then buy an expansion that gives you lot's of new stuff. I would probably also have more hours played by now xD

 

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

I can respect that. For me its clear why they did it, since they are not a small indi company that started out yesterday, but if you have doubts, thats valid for me.

Because they are a rather small grand strategy developer.

 

[Had a dad]

You changed a core element of somehting I had already payed for and want me to pay you again to make it work the way you think is the right way. (If you dont think its part of the new machanic, then you would not sell it as a dlc).

if they went with the old expansion model, you would have to pay for it... so what you seem to be commenting on is you want all new stuff for free... you can still play it the old way, just like you would be able to play it the old way if they used an expansion model...

 

[Wizzington]

There are plenty of 'core' features where you need to pay to make it work the 'right way'. For example: Transfer occupation is a crucial part of waging war the 'right way'. Caravan Power is a crucial part of making money from land trade.

This is an inevitable result of our expansion model, because if we couldn't touch core features we'd be unable to expand the game in any meaningful way.

In fact, since under the old model you'd be stuck in the previous patch, why don't you just revert to 1.11 and enjoy the full experience of the old expansion system?

 

[Phönix]

Because they are a rather small grand strategy developer.

Not anymore. Really, they are quite big now. Not as big as EA mind you, but they are already a big company.

 

[hjarg]

Hi everyone. I am not sure how long this post will last here and if and when I will be banned for this. Lets face it, free speach is the latest casulty of cour once great civilisation.

Nevermind the rest of it, too lazy to read all replies and so on, but it really peeves me when people don't understand the meaning of free speach.

Basically, free speech is government guarantee that you will not be jailed- or otherwise prosecuted- for expressing your opinion. Unless you are preaching violence or criminal activities or such. It has nothing to do with Paradox, for Paradox is not government.
Making these forums available- and posting in them, is a privilege, not right. Just as you don't march into office of for example, The Times, and demand that yay, we have free speech, now publish my article, you cannot expect any different treatment from any privately-held (or even state-controlled) newspaper, forum, tv, blog, whatever.

Freedom of speech means you can make your own blog about boycotting Paradox. Or webpage. Or whatever. You just can't assume that Paradox has obligation to let you post here, as you can't assume that you have the right to do so. But no worries, freedom of speech still prevails- even if you are blocked, you will not be jailed or worse. Unless there are Paradoxian death squads we don't know anything about....

 

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

@Phönix , you go boycott them, maybe they will get 30 euro's less.

 

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

Unless there are Paradoxian death squads we don't know anything about....

Shhh, they will know...

 

[kontinos]

Because the only way to not do that would be to make development free, and I don't buy the argument that being able to increase building slots (which is just a secondary effect of development in the first place) is so incredibly crucial that it absolutely needs to be free. I can think of far more important things that are 'behind a paywall', because ultimately we are a business and unless we can charge money for expansions we won't have any money to pay for continued development.

Well said. Here we have an honest "mea culpa" answer, and let's have this case rested for once and for all. If you had made this clear on launch of CS, i am sure people like me and phoenix and many more who have raised this issue, though not totally in agreement with you and each other, would not bother at all. And, if that interests you at all, i may not buy every dlc on release day, i might wait for a discount if i feel i can do without it or am short on cash, but i buy all your dlcs, because i think you deserve the money exactly because of your continued development of the game.
However, if you think something is bad with your game and change it (like the building system), it's different from thinking something in your game is too simple or boring and decide to add flavor to it (religions).
So, i hope what happened with Common Sense, was just a misstep of paradox.

 

[Phönix]

There are plenty of 'core' features where you need to pay to make it work the 'right way'. For example: Transfer occupation is a crucial part of waging war the 'right way'.

No its not. Just cause its better does not mean anything. A game can always be improved uppon, its never "finished". I can understand that. Taking a feature out and the reselling it is whats sketchy, and while this is of course not quite what you did, it goes in this direction. If you change a core mechanic, then you should give the full alternative. If you then ad to the full alternative a year later, thats perfectly ok. But if you replace the full old mechanic with half the new mechanic and sell the other half... mate thats basiclly day-one-dls... just WORSE!

 

[Xaster]

Again with the discussion about the usefullness of the dlc? Thats now the point. Never has been. Never will.

Ok, just to be sure and understand each other better, the problem you have is that in the game without CS if you hover over the development part (or construction, i don't remember) you can read "cannot build without X

Because the only way to not do that would be to make development free, and I don't buy the argument that being able to increase building slots (which is just a secondary effect of development in the first place) is so incredibly crucial that it absolutely needs to be free.

Well, I don't have CS and I have never had the problem "Oooh how I would like to build this there" ok, maybe 1 or 2 times. But I remember almost 10-20 times when i said "thank God I don't have to read again what the 45th building does differently from the 34 and the 23th"

And yes maybe the problem is that I am someone who started gaming in the late 90s, when a game was a game and an expansion an expansion.

I don't want to be overly critical but, have you ever stopped for a moment and thought that maybe, the problem is that you have nothing important to do?
Because, hell, I'm dirt poor and I would like to have a bunch of games and dlc for free because videogames are a really good form of escapism. But that doesn't mean that when I write on a forum I feel the need to be "outraged" because of a game, or of an advertising, or something similar. If, as you written, you are so interested in looking at the man in the mirror, than do it, and remember that you are really lucky if the worst thing you can think of are paradox dlc!