Does the DLC Model Mean HOI4 Will Get Worse Over Time?

[Faeelin]

So, we know that Paradox has a subscription model from here on out (unless it's a game that doesn't sell well, but HOI4 is a flagship title).

EU4 shows where that road ends. The DLCs aren't related to each other, so different systems are bolted on. The AI is unable to use these systems properly, let alone basic mechanics (witness the reports about the AI having max mana which it doesn't use). Each DLC has increasingly over the top mission trees and content because you gotta sell something.

Now, look at HOI4. The Espionage system was released, and isn't really being revised anymore. The AI doesn't know how to use it, and still struggles with templates. The AI's performance with naval units is similarly unimpressive, while mechanics like AI units eating your supply are still in years after release. Mission trees extend to giving Poland an offmap nuclear reactor and a weird Nazi king.

Given that the DLCs are designed to be an ala carte menu, HOI4 will end up with increasingly over the top mission trees and, within a few years, wunderwaffen like Nazi power armor. Which is fine, Paradox has to eat. But I would like to be wrong.

 

[bitmode]

But I would like to be wrong.

Sorry to disappoint you but your expectations are way above the average customer's Paradox has today.

 

[Dlin369]

All things have to come to an end eventually, it’s just a matter of when.

I think realistically, since Hoi4 is running out of majors to sell dlcs with, we can expect to see 2-3 more major expansions, one with USSR as a focus and one with Italy.

After that, they’ll probably move to smaller country packs like BtFB to round out the remaining regions of the world. Plus maybe Wonder weapons and League of Nations/UN stuff.

I hope while Hoi4 is still profitable to keep running they add a good amount of free content and work to integrate all the majors’ trees + alt history trees.

Less likely scenario would be timeline extensions, either back a few years or forward a few. I doubt that’ll happen since they said they tend to avoid different start dates, but it could be another way for them to keep bringing money to the project

 

[OldCleric]

Paradox clearly needs a direct competitor in the 4x genre to force them to shake off their numerous bad habits.

 

[safe-keeper]

So, we know that Paradox has a subscription model from here on out (unless it's a game that doesn't sell well, but HOI4 is a flagship title).

EU4 shows where that road ends. The DLCs aren't related to each other, so different systems are bolted on. The AI is unable to use these systems properly, let alone basic mechanics (witness the reports about the AI having max mana which it doesn't use). Each DLC has increasingly over the top mission trees and content because you gotta sell something.

I don't play EU4, but this sounds suspiciously like the DLCs for Stellaris. It's a fun game, but it's also a Quidditch-esque mess of systems that don't interact with each other, and also don't seem to be supported and updated after the initial DLC release.

Their recent trend with putting long-awaited fixes behind paywalls is worrisome, too.

 

[Sniper35]

I play more multiplayer than singleplayer but so far ive found the mechanics added to the game since start have been pretty good.

This next DLC has me as excited for the update as i was for the game originally.

 

[pheonicia]

I mean the dlc model is the same one that they've been using since release, so unless you think hoi4 is worse off now than it was back then, I think it should probably get better over time.

 

[goodcigar]

I would like to say something. The HOI4 team @Archangel85 @podcat @Jamor @Besuchov @YaBoy_Bobby should not be afraid to rework old/core code if necessary to make big or small changes. The reluctance to do this causes problems later on with DLC and quality and player expectations I believe. I think EU4 has suffered from this in particular.

If you explain to the community that you want extra time to implement more features they will likely be okay with waiting. It may take longer but it is worth the wait. The HOI4 audience is already used to waiting a long time between major updates.

 

[Mr_Dimento]

wunderwaffen like Nazi power armor.

lmao, I laughed so hard thinking about wonderwaffe nazi power armor 3d models attacking the maginot or some shit

 

[grandad1982]

Well we can already see some of the issues with compartmentalised dlc, and that's that old dlc is fire and forget pretty much. Once the money for a dlc has been made there is little incentive to go back and sort out all the flaws or work in mechanics from newer patches and dlc.

It doesn't seem so pronounced in hoi4 but for an example of a game that is a bunch of lackluster disconnected stuff look at Stellaris (imo).

 

[kimidf]

All things have to come to an end eventually, it’s just a matter of when.

I think realistically, since Hoi4 is running out of majors to sell dlcs with, we can expect to see 2-3 more major expansions, one with USSR as a focus and one with Italy.

After that, they’ll probably move to smaller country packs like BtFB to round out the remaining regions of the world. Plus maybe Wonder weapons and League of Nations/UN stuff.

I hope while Hoi4 is still profitable to keep running they add a good amount of free content and work to integrate all the majors’ trees + alt history trees.

Less likely scenario would be timeline extensions, either back a few years or forward a few. I doubt that’ll happen since they said they tend to avoid different start dates, but it could be another way for them to keep bringing money to the project

I am convinced when the big reworks round are over and the big countries could still be somehow profitable and attractive as important modifications but not a height of a rework as it is a clear example of the German tree it is true that country packs will be more common but it is convinced that still great dlcs that make important reworks great mechanics will still be the main focus of attention of those great dlcs more than the own approaches that come in the dlc itself

 

[safe-keeper]

I don't get the idea behind "regional DLC" except as an excuse to sell you a low quality minor stuff just to keep the machine going.
I don't get the idea that every DLC has to be a rework of a major country.

Of course, if you keep this kind of DLC mentality, you're going to run out pretty fast.

But the idea of selling 300 DLCs, in my opinion, is also a terrible idea, and that's going on with the subscription model (I think this is horrible, one of the worse thing that the gaming industry has to offer, along season pass, lootboxes and day1 DLCs : Trying to milk us more and more like the cows they think we are).

There's a logic to day 1 DLCs, AFAIK. When a game nears release, often it will have most of the development fixed as playtesters iron out as many bugs and balance issues and such as possible. This leaves artists and other non-testing devs with little to do (apart from helping to test the game, of course), so giving them some tasks means they're not just sitting there gathering dust. Then you can release the content they make as a DLC for the people who want it.

As for 300 DLCs, the longer you make DLCs for a game, the longer you can support that game with free patches. I own only one DLC for CK2 - the Old Gods. I need nothing more. Okay, I have Sword of Islam, too, but I never seem to get around to play as any of the Muslim nations . But I digress. Point is, when done right, the PDX DLC model allows them to stick with a game for a decade or more, when other dev companies would've thrown it by the wayside to make another of a series of endless sequels and spin-offs. Without DLCs We might have been playing "Crusader Kings (2021)" (read: Crusader Kings 9, but then the marketing team figured out it would sell better if they just removed the number) today.

Then again, I really wish the devs would combine DLCs, or make them cost less and less over time (possibly down to zero). I get that buying a game and looking at a wall of DLCs must be off-putting.

 

[safe-keeper]

lmao, I laughed so hard thinking about wonderwaffe nazi power armor 3d models attacking the maginot or some shit

"First they came for the Wookies..."

 

[Viktor Hark]

Yes but ihmo there is waaaaaay more room for actual improvement in HoI4 than it was in EU4. Someday we will reach the power creep the likes of 'spend pp to pick another perk for your country leader' or 'spend command power to give your divisions 500%+ exp gain', that is certain. But before we get there, there will be a few years and versions worth of good, entertaining strategy videogame.

 

[uberjedi]

MP will be fine.

But the health of the AI patient is declining with each DLC.
No improvement is to be expected.

 

[Faeelin]

I mean the dlc model is the same one that they've been using since release, so unless you think hoi4 is worse off now than it was back then, I think it should probably get better over time.

I mean, in terms of an AI challenge, I think it clearly is? It doesn't know how to use the naval designer, and it doesn't use espionage. The additions are just more win harder. And the last comment I saw from a dev on the AI implied the AI is not a big priority because players want an easy map painting game.

 

[pheonicia]

I mean, in terms of an AI challenge, I think it clearly is? It doesn't know how to use the naval designer, and it doesn't use espionage. The additions are just more win harder. And the last comment I saw from a dev on the AI implied the AI is not a big priority because players want an easy map painting game.

... I don't know how it could be easier now than when the ai would straight up abandon front lines for no reason. Edit: hm, that didn't speak the way I intended.

 

[podcat]

And the last comment I saw from a dev on the AI implied the AI is not a big priority because players want an easy map painting game.

I find that incredibly hard to imagine someone saying. That said making the AI more difficult to play against would definitely be an issue for some players. Remember that 40% of players are on easy or very easy difficulty settings. I dont remember if it was Tiger or MTG but we had quite a reaction from players who got rolled by the ai so its something I take seriously.

 

[cotne22]

Rolled over by the AI? The AI that can't even push through a single tile on a frontline spanning half of europe? The same AI that can't even push two infantry divisions? Are we even playing the same game?

 

[DicRoNero]

I find that incredibly hard to imagine someone saying. That said making the AI more difficult to play against would definitely be an issue for some players. Remember that 40% of players are on easy or very easy difficulty settings. I dont remember if it was Tiger or MTG but we had quite a reaction from players who got rolled by the ai so its something I take seriously.

There's always an option of adding a real difficulty slider based on actual AI strength rather than some arbitrary mana generation penalties and whatnot. I simply can't imagine adjusting Komodo chess engine to give the player several extra starting Queens at Super Easy.

edit: to be more clear, playing a balanced game against opponent adequate to your skill is fun, playing handicapped to match AI's incapabilities - is not.