DLC policy of paradox is kinda sad.

[panionios]

I expect they have, and the conclusion was "This is the correct price point"

Case A: DLC price is $0.99.

Case B: DLC price is $1.99.

Case A ships 20 000 units and grosses $19800 of income

Case B ships 12 000 units. Oh, the humanity. 8000 units less! Let's look at the gross... carry the one... comes to $23880.

Now, the clever observer will note that despite shipping fewer units, the profit increased. ECONOMICS, BI***.

Now, Case B is obviously more profitable in the short term. In the long term Case A may be more profitable since more consumers now increases the potential for more consumers later, but a bird in the hand, and all that.

The Law of Demand and Supply really is Great (in theory only)

 

[hitchens]

Music and unit packs dlc's are great. You dont need them to play the game so if you dont want to part with 2-3 bucks then you dont have to. Personally I would gladly fork out another $10 for more music.

 

[Slargos]

The Law of Demand and Supply really is Great (in theory only)

What about in practice? Is it Greater?

 

[Topsy Cret]

I personally don't have an issue with them charging for purely cosmetic stuff. That being said, I suspect it's unreasonable to believe that the sum total wouldn't be a shade lower if it were all bundled together (bundles are generally cheaper, in any industry). So in that sense, people who don't buy the extras are saving money, and people who do buy the extras are "losing" money.

The sum of the CoP DLCs is 20.96. Admittedly this is slightly more than the base 19.99 it might cost if it were bundled together into a single expansion. However, this has no effect whatsoever on the people who are only interested in purchasing the new mechanics, as it it still cheaper. As for cosmetics and music, I think people underestimate the time and cost that is put into both of these - there are people employed who's sole purpose is to create textures and compose music for these games, after all.

Furthermore, if someone such as myself is intent on purchasing all the DLCs for CoP, I doubt the additional euro here or dollar there is going to discourage that activity.

 

[rybka]

I dont like EU4 DLCs released so far so I did not buy any. Thats it.
I dont listen to in game music, about unit models and graphics I dont care at all.

Bring DLC which makes peace time much more interestig (internal policies, factions, deeper dynasties etc.) and I might buy it.

 

[kykinson]

Paradox does this for the people who dont care about the new units etc. The Expansion would be 20 Euros with all those dlc's but they made it that you can buy them apart and only buy what you want.

 

[neaiskink]

They make good games.
From my standpoint they could have included it all into the price and I would have paid anyway. Now, I can avoid some of the least interesting DLC.

All Hail Paradox!

 

[Wrathe]

I don't mind going "Take my money" with Paradox but I really think they are shooting themselves in the foot or something with this DLC policy... The proof would be how horrible it was to enter all those CD-Keys from GG to Steam conversion of CK2, there's just too much DLC and it's really hard to check if you own them all in my case. Perhaps all 3 cosmetic DLCs could be one DLC at least =/

 

[Admiral Bart]

Some of the DLC do have a weird (high) pricepoint but most seem to be priced fine (and DLC are VERY often in sale (ranging from -50% to -75%). And:
- Paradox does still cater mostly to a niche. Altough since CK2 more players seem to have found these wonderful games. But its still nowhere near what (for example) the witcher sells. (At least as far as I know).
- The game is very moddable and you can easily add music (among other things) from different sources
- The basegame is now updated for everyone. Even if you only bought CK2 base or the EU4 base game, your game has so much improved (and will be continued to be improved upon).

 

[kosarev]

What about in practice? Is it Greater?

In practice people die of famine and of obessity at the same time. So lesser would be more appropiate.

 

[masteriw]

Rational people that don't like to get duped vs fanboys ITT.

The saddest part is that the best argument people can come up with is "if you don't like it don't buy it" or "it costs less than a hamburger".

Whats sad about that is that you are dismissing people who are standing up against a growing trend paying more money for less content. It's not about the few bucks, it's about the idea behind it. These people are also in it for YOUR interests.

Four years ago Paradox would never have thought of something like this, but they see that pretty much every other developer (except CD Projekt) is doing this and they feel they are not getting as much money out of these games as they could. That's all, everyone in the world is out for our money, sweet stories regarding more freedom about what content to get is just marketing talk. It's all capitalism. And it's sad.

What do you want, a law limiting the amount of DLC a company can release? Will you occupy Paradox headquarters to force a rollback in their marketing policy?

 

[Slargos]

In practice people die of famine and of obessity at the same time. So lesser would be more appropiate.

:laugh:

That's so much more than just a simple supply/demand equation.

People will never stop amusing. :laugh:

 

[masteriw]

:laugh:

That's so much more than just a simple supply/demand equation.

People will never stop amusing. :laugh:

Socialist logic for you, "economic laws don't hold because not everyone has their needs met"

 

[Searry]

I agree there's just too many of them and most probably, nobody will ever buy them if they aren't in a bundle. And the pricing good god, HoD is still 20 euros, CoP will cost 15 euros...

 

[hwoosh]

Even granting the distinction between the two in the context of EU4, the gameplay systems elaboration that you identify could clearly be construed as "an essential component of what the artifact was intended to be", hence the sentiment regarding "paying for things that 'should' be in the base game", because people like to think that they're paying for "the game as it was envisioned to be", not "the game as far as it could be completed by some deadline".

If the developers had tried to pack every feature in all the planned expansions to CK2 into the base game, and tested and balanced it all themselves, to release it in one fell swoop, it would probably take ten years to finish. That's the entire point. The criterion '"should" be in the base game' is illusory.

And of course episodic narrative installments really aren't relevant to EU4, and are closer to sequels in other media than systems expansions, as you suggest.

But you were asking why games in general were "special" as compared to other media. Corridor shooters and RPGs are still games, and developers are using the same DLC model as for strategy games. An explanation that depends on some special feature of grand strategy games would not be very useful for answering your question.

 

[Topsy Cret]

I don't mind going "Take my money" with Paradox but I really think they are shooting themselves in the foot or something with this DLC policy... The proof would be how horrible it was to enter all those CD-Keys from GG to Steam conversion of CK2, there's just too much DLC and it's really hard to check if you own them all in my case. Perhaps all 3 cosmetic DLCs could be one DLC at least =/

Uhhh... Steam is the platform that Paradox games are optimized for. If you use a third-party company to buy your DLCs even though Steam is required to even play the game, you can't blame Paradox.

 

[Pete0714]

Its kinda sad that you release music and new units for your expansion as additional DLC.. rly.. even EA doesnt have a balls to screw their customers this hard. Paradox is lucky to have so many loyal fans.
Their games are godlike.. dont get me wrong. :unsure:

I take it you never experienced their former expansion system , where everything was together wholesale and if you didn't pay 20 for expansions,warts and all, you didn't get any further patches. With the new system you get patches free and continuously throughout the evolution of the game development. In short,: first world problems.

 

[Mann42]

so having additional portraits which should have been in game in first place at the cost of almost 20$ is okay? how long did it took to make them? few days at most?

A few days? Really? You've never worked on a game or mod before, have you? If you have, I can't imagine it was of particularly good quality.

Please don't quote time and task estimates on how long cosmetic additions to a game cost unless you're an artist in the game industry. Otherwise, you only reinforce your ignorance for all to see.

I mean, you can always draw your own and mod them in. Nothing stopping you from doing that.

My inner developer laughs with glee when people claim a studio is greedy for selling cosmetic DLC while simultaneously giving the community the tools to create their own cosmetic content instead. For free. That they can distribute to each other. For free.

(Not saying you are, person quoted, just using your quote as a springboard)

Paradox reduces the cost of their mechanical expansion by removing the cosmetic changes and selling them separately, reducing their potential income by giving players the choice of what to buy. They sell the most important expansions for less, but this makes them greedy.

Man, Paradox is so damned greedy, the way they provide tools for allowing community made cosmetic content for free, the way they reduce the cost of their mechanical expansion, and separate cosmetic content so you don't have to pay for it when you buy a mechanics expansion.

And they provide the most important mechanics changes, updates, and patches FOR FREE. To everyone.

All the ways they reduce their potential income stream to give the players more choice... CLEARLY A CASH GRAB.

What are some of you guys smoking? Because it must be awesome to be so phenomenally disconnected from reality. After 10 years in the game industry and an understanding of sales metrics, I'm always woefully unprepared for the sheer ignorance on display among players that want to justify why they think they deserve something for "free".

 

[Grell74]

Nice rant, but you might want to check your own ignorance and ridiculous claims.

Paradox DOES NOT provide tools for cosmetic modifications, indeed they are hugely restrictive. Unit "sprites" and map landmarks are not moddable and require a licensed program which costs $10,000+. This preserves their monopoly on unit packs and protects their relatively high priced DLCs since modders are not able to do this.

A few days? Really? You've never worked on a game or mod before, have you? If you have, I can't imagine it was of particularly good quality.

Please don't quote time and task estimates on how long cosmetic additions to a game cost unless you're an artist in the game industry. Otherwise, you only reinforce your ignorance for all to see.

My inner developer laughs with glee when people claim a studio is greedy for selling cosmetic DLC while simultaneously giving the community the tools to create their own cosmetic content instead. For free. That they can distribute to each other. For free.

...

What are some of you guys smoking? Because it must be awesome to be so phenomenally disconnected from reality. After 10 years in the game industry and an understanding of sales metrics, I'm always woefully unprepared for the sheer ignorance on display among players that want to justify why they think they deserve something for "free".

 

[Doukan]

Parardox's DLC policy isn't ideal, I personally would prefer the "full package".
But you've got to remember that Paradox is a for profit company, of course they're going to seek out ways to squeeze just a little (and it is only a little) more money out, I very doubt they do it purely for purchasers convenience, it's sad but that's just the way things are, and you can't really blame them for it either.
There's no point getting all hot and bothered "muh Evul Paradox EA! RAGH! about it, Paradox isn't EA and they don't (yet/obviously) cut features, they (so they say) develop them separately.
It's perfectly fine to not like the way things are, just don't start being an entitled brat about it....