• 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.
I've always wanted to ask to someone in the field if, psychological pricing speaking, there is any difference in ending the price between .99, .98 or .49 :D .

I don't know, but what I know is that a few years ago in my country, France, the government was talking about making prices in -9.99 illegal. I'm not sure if they went through with it.
 
They didn't. I still see that in most French shops.
 
Thanks Gruffa for the update, I think it's good when Paradox communicates about the pricing policy and for me this thread is a step in the right direction.

However (yes, I know you saw that coming), I would have been interested in the "value score" (as Wiz did 2 years ago for EUIV, see post above) because that's really the important part here, imo

The other part is the grouping of cosmetic elements and I understand both rationale (having too many DLC is not a good idea, enabling people to cherrypick can be nice), so no perfect solutions here.
For the pricing points, I personnally wouldn't mind several ones but I understand the logic
 
Hello everyone!

I’m Gustav “Gruffa” Groth, Product Manager for CK2. I’ve previously written a dev diary about what goes into releasing an expansion from the publishing point of view. You can find that dev diary here.

As you may have already inferred from reading the title of this post, this is not a dev diary, and I won’t bring up any new features or content in the upcoming expansion, Jade Dragon. Instead, I will talk about how we determine the pricing of CK2 expansions, and reveal the price of Jade Dragon. You can expect more publishing diaries from me in the future, because we’d like to shed light on the publishing operations behind CK2 and have opportunities for discussions about related topics with the community. Please note that dev diaries will continue to be posted in the same manner and frequency as usual. Publishing diaries are an addition, not a replacement. ;)

Let’s jump right into it! It’s my honor and pleasure to announce that Jade Dragon will be available for purchase for $14.99.

Why $14.99? There’s no exact science to pricing, and there’s no right or wrong answer to what the correct price is. I’ll attempt to summarize our method below:

Who makes the decision?
The price point decision is taken by the CK2 product team. I described the product team in further detail in my previous dev diary, but in short it consists of the Product Manager, the Product Marketing Manager, the Game Director and the Project Lead. This combination of people represent all aspects of the development team and the publishing organization and should be able to make the best informed decision.

Estimating value
For every new expansion that’s being planned, the game designers attempt to estimate what the perceived value of the expansion is to the player. They break it down into its features and how impactful each feature will feel. Using this method, each expansion receives a “value score” which can be compared to the value score of our earlier expansions. By looking at the reception (forum discussions, reviews etc.) and financial performance (revenue) of earlier expansions, we can evaluate whether or not you found their value-to-price ratio fair.

Pricing as means of communication
Using the abovementioned method, one may argue that the price levels could be more flexible. The majority of expansions have been priced at either $14.99 or $9.99. Why are all CK2 expansions (Way of Life being the exception) priced at a multiple of 5? The reason is that the price point itself is a very effective way of communicating value and help the player manage their expectations. Having a wildly varying mix of odd price points such as $8.99 or $12.49 would be confusing to both the player and ourselves. If we’re good at being consistent with the amount and quality of content in $14.99 or $9.99 expansions, players know what they can expect when they see those price tags. Now, getting that consistency is an area of improvement for us, but know that we’re doing our best.

Why $14.99?
Given the “multiples of 5 rule” described above, one might wonder, why wasn’t this priced at $9.99 or $19.99? The simple answer is that when Henrik Fåhraeus and Alexander Oltner designed Jade Dragon, they had $10 worth of gameplay systems, and $5 of cosmetic as well as musical content, in mind. Together, these add up to a value of $15.

We first experimented with including cosmetic content in the expansion itself with Monks & Mystics, with good results. Why did we do that? Throughout CK2’s lifetime, we have tried different ways of adding cosmetic content to the game. There have been portrait, unit and dynasty shield packs. Later on, we graduated to releasing content packs alongside the expansions. And the list of DLC kept growing… We’re aware that the extensive selection of DLC is prone to discourage new players from getting into the game, and old players from returning. Therefore we have taken action to slim down the amount of DLCs available on the store pages, like bundling them into collections and the like. These measures would lose their meaning if we kept throwing new, small piece-meal DLC onto the, now cleaner, store pages. That’s why we opted for this method.

Wrapping up
That was all I had to say about pricing this time. I look forward to releasing Jade Dragon and see what you think about it! I have to run to a meeting now but I'll be back in an hour to answer any questions you may have! :)

Cheers,
Gustav

Thanks for the insights :) I hope this will dissuade at least some people from complaining... :p
 
I was surprised and a little disappointed that today's Dev Diary did not have a specific breakdown of the value of each particular component.

Here's a link to an EU4 DD from about 2 years ago where Wiz went into great detail on how some of the then-recent DLC had been priced:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/eu4-dev-diary-december-3rd-2015.894626/

I know you mention today that DLC pricing is "not a science", but the DD above clearly ties DLC prices to specific deliverables.

Some follow-up questions:

Is the DLC pricing model for CK2 different than EU4 and other Paradox games? More specifically, does each Paradox game set its own prices independently of each other game? (It seems so based on your DD, but perhaps the committee that you mentioned then has its price point vetted by execs further up the ladder.)

Alternatively, does Paradox have a single, uniform policy on its DLC pricing?

From an organizational, decision-making standpoint, pricing is set in the product teams for every respective product, completely independently from each other. Naturally, both devs and publishing folks who work on different products talk to each other and share learnings. We try to stay synced so that our price-to-value ratios are coherent across products.
 
I prefer cosmetic DLCs being separate from expansions, but I understand the change. As long as majority of consumers are too lazy to think (I'll never not be baffled by how foreign the concept of "you don't need to have all these add-ons" is to most people), we can't have nice things.
 
I prefer cosmetic DLCs being separate from expansions, but I understand the change. As long as majority of consumers are too lazy to think (I'll never not be baffled by how foreign the concept of "you don't need to have all these add-ons" is to most people), we can't have nice things.

Why does the agree button go away when I've only clicked it once? :(
 
My God you're greedy bunch! Making "China DLC without China" so expensive, and refusing to lower prices for old DLCs is just... so douchy. Your whole concept of endless stamping of money-jerking DLCs is so wrong. EA and Ubisoft are saints compared to you.
 
Last edited:
My God you're greedy bunch! Making "China DLC without China" so expensive, and not refusing to lower prices for old DLCs is just... so douchy. Your whole concept of endless stamping of money-jerking DLCs is so wrong. EA and Ubisoft are saints compared to you.

The funny fact about all these "you are greedy!!1!" comments is that, if this DLC model was profitable, other publishers would use it as well. But alas it isn't, and PDS would actually make much more money by releasing two 30$ expansions and a sequel every 2 years.
 
I can see getting at least about two beers worth of enjoyment from this DLC so the price seems fine.
 
Can we have it in the UK using the old exchange rate?

The exchange rate collapsed because of Brexit. It seems a bit unfair to ask a Swedish company to subsidize British consumers. If you want a second referendum so that sterling strengthens again, this thread might not be the best place to ask for it. :rolleyes:

The funny fact about all these "you are greedy!!1!" comments is that, if this DLC model was profitable, other publishers would use it as well. But alas it isn't, and PDS would actually make much more money by releasing two 30$ expansions and a sequel every 2-3 years.

According to the information in their last annual report, PDX is very profitable. It's a bit hard to know how much of this is due to the current DLC model. Game companies' margins can vary a lot from year to year depending upon development cycles and the IPO might have had one-off effects too. It might be that published games or Prison Architect are bringing in the millions. But given that all the big, current games (CK2, EUIV4, HOI4, Stellaris, Skylines) use the DLC model, it seems likely that it's helping somewhat.
 
According to the information in their last annual report, PDX is very profitable (though game companies' margins can vary a lot from year to year depending upon development cycles and the IPO might have had one-off effects too).

If they were at CK4, EU5, and with Stellaris 2 in development, they'd be even more so.
The issue is not really are they profitable or not, but how profitable something is. If the model was not making profit, they would have abandoned it years ago. But profit can always be larger.
 
Can we have it in the UK using the old exchange rate?
Yes please I miss Sterling having value, we're on level with plastic european money and nearly on par with the dollar now ;/ And innit, laughing at those OMG SO HIGH PRICED, fam thats literally the price of three/four beers in most pubs. If your so broke you cant afford to shell out a bit over a tenner every few months then dont play xD
 
If they were at CK4, EU5, and with Stellaris 2 in development, they'd be even more so.
The issue is not really are they profitable or not, but how profitable something is. If the model was not making profit, they would have abandoned it years ago. But profit can always be larger.

You're quite right to point out that the level of profitability is important for this discussion. But, in a favourite saying of the great David Butler, "never argue about ascertainable facts"! In the best Swedish traditions of transparency, PDX make the data available (source):

PDX Profitability.JPG


Most CEOs would kill to have an operating margin of 49%; that's twice would you would normally look for (though I don't know much about the computer games sector specifically). And we can see that profitability has increased substantially since the current model was introduced around 2012. Now there might be other reasons for that. I strongly suspect that the company is gaining economies from scale, and that they get much better margins by distributing through Steam rather than through printing & distributing DVDs. Steam must also have been very, very important in growing market share (which has great potential for increasing profitability in an industry with high development charges and a marginal cost close to zero). I don't know how much any legacy interactions with GamersGate may have influenced the early years. But, to return to the original point, this data doesn't seem to support the claim that the current DLC pricing model is unprofitable & should be abandoned.
 
Last edited:
In early days of CK2, we would get one expansion, one portrait pack, one unit pack and one music pack.
Yeah, list of DLC content started to rise dramatically. I really understand how this huge list could discourage new buyers.
Personally, I didn't mind, but it was getting a bit chaotic.

But then, instead of four DLC, we started getting two DLC.
Or, one expansion and one content pack.

And it was perfect.
Not everyone wants these extra gimmicks. Some people just want gameplay from the actual expansion.
If you don't want it, you don't buy it.
Sounds good to me.

When we were getting four separate DLC per single release, that was indeed too much. But two isn't really that scary.

Bundling everything together indeed makes things easier for most of the people.
But people who don't want extra gimmicks are left with no choice but to pay extra cash on stuff they don't want.
They will buy it, but you leave them a bit dissatisfied.

And then you get negative ratings on Steam, and less people buy your stuff.

Is it really worth it?

Some people perceive that as greed, and bad DLC policy.
No matter whether you or some forum folk disagree with this.
There is still a bunch of people who just can't stand this behavior and never will.
And all it takes to avoid that is to separate the extra stuff.
 
This is so much better than releasing a Content Pack with an EP that should have been embedded with the EP in the first place. I consider this a fair price, though I'd have priced it at ten dollars.
 
This is so much better than releasing a Content Pack with an EP that should have been embedded with the EP in the first place. I consider this a fair price, though I'd have priced it at ten dollars.

So you would say the whole expansion without the content pack would be.,.. worth only 5 dollar?!
 
So you would say the whole expansion without the content pack would be.,.. worth only 5 dollar?!

The other way around, I think.

In all honesty, no CKII expansion is objectively worth $15. Any game with more than a dozen expansions is going to be financially frustrating no matter the price tags. I'm normally against the idea of "season passes," but in all honesty? I'd rather have paid once for a $100 CKII that contains all of its future content than paid many times that amount for all of its individual DLCs.
 
I fundamentally oppose the concept of a "season pass" system. Not only is it EA-tier greed, it often rips people off because of the fluctuating prices that may end up in you getting one big EP and a little feature pack when you were hoping to get the big stuff at a discount.

However, I have NEVER seen a lifetime "season pass", but if that was a thing, I could support that. One hundred dollars up front for two hundred dollars of EP content for the next ten years? That's a decent deal.