After awhile DLCs should just come with the base game, at the base price. No special edition, no price hike, just add it in there, it gets way too expensive to get into the game otherwise.
EU4's recent Steam reviews are now at Mixed with 48% rating. Discuss?
- Thread starter fr0nt1er
- 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.
All the old DLC's should be bundled into the base game.
Anything older than 2 years, as another poster said above.
It would make 0 difference to longtime players like myself, and I guess most people on these forums. I buy DLCs on release, I love the game, I'm happy to support the development at full price.
For new players however... let's say I've never played EUIV and I see the game and the amount of DLCs. I'd be overwhelmed and might never get into EUIV! The idea of what I might miss saddens me.
Anything older than 2 years, as another poster said above.
It would make 0 difference to longtime players like myself, and I guess most people on these forums. I buy DLCs on release, I love the game, I'm happy to support the development at full price.
For new players however... let's say I've never played EUIV and I see the game and the amount of DLCs. I'd be overwhelmed and might never get into EUIV! The idea of what I might miss saddens me.
One day, Paradox will become the new EA sims. Luckily I don't have a lot of games I play consistently.
my friends know about my second wife euvi; and i consider this game part of my life as a human being, just like sesamstraat/sesamestreet as a kid, however i wouldn't recommend the game to someone else (who didn't already owned the game). because:
-the total ammount of dlc results in featurecreep and a serious entrylevel.
-some essential vanilla functions are locked in dlc, therefore making a vanilla buy not ideal.
-it is easier to start in stellaris because it hasn't had much dlc yet and therefore less legacy to learn.
it feels like this game is getting designed for the oldtimer community because the main playergroup is oldtimer. so yes it is a good game; and yes i think it is a good thing new players are warned.
-the total ammount of dlc results in featurecreep and a serious entrylevel.
-some essential vanilla functions are locked in dlc, therefore making a vanilla buy not ideal.
-it is easier to start in stellaris because it hasn't had much dlc yet and therefore less legacy to learn.
it feels like this game is getting designed for the oldtimer community because the main playergroup is oldtimer. so yes it is a good game; and yes i think it is a good thing new players are warned.
Thank you, thank you everyone for your inputs! A lot of different opinions, that's great!
Some of you have mentioned that the DLC policy is fine as it is - I would agree with this statement in regards with new DLC, however keep in mind that some of the DLC are 1-2 years old now - surely, the sensible course of action, as with an MMO, for instance, would be to integrate this old content into the base game.
The issue is not the pricing itself (although I might contradict myself here later even in this post), the issue is that the price gate for the new players grows bigger and bigger. Surely, yes, you can enjoy the base game, DLC provides extra features, but when you know that you WILL spend X amount of $$$ at some point later on is damning, hanging over the player's head like Damocles' sword. Think and calculate how much money have you actually spent on EU4 during its lifespan - does the number not impress you in any way?
Another point raised was that the DLC should be purchased when they go on sale. The problem with this point is, the player is forced into arbitrary limitations and time constraints, and while it is a practice that works, it seems like a poor way out of this situation.
Lastly, majority of you guys skimmed over the price raise that occured very recently. a 1.5-2X increase across the board in many regions, without a public statement (to my knowledge, please point me in a direction if there was an announcement/explanation) is a very serious dealbreaker. As I mentioned, the price in some regions ramps up to a cost of a higher end gadget - and EU4 is NOT comparable to a higher end tech gadget, Im sorry, I love the game too and I spent an incredible amount of hours on it, but it seems ridiculous to think about it.
It is perfectly fine for a game to be designed around a smaller old time community, but would sure be really nice to get a word from Paradox on it, do you guys have any issues on your end? Is there a decrease in the number of new players at all?
Some of you have mentioned that the DLC policy is fine as it is - I would agree with this statement in regards with new DLC, however keep in mind that some of the DLC are 1-2 years old now - surely, the sensible course of action, as with an MMO, for instance, would be to integrate this old content into the base game.
The issue is not the pricing itself (although I might contradict myself here later even in this post), the issue is that the price gate for the new players grows bigger and bigger. Surely, yes, you can enjoy the base game, DLC provides extra features, but when you know that you WILL spend X amount of $$$ at some point later on is damning, hanging over the player's head like Damocles' sword. Think and calculate how much money have you actually spent on EU4 during its lifespan - does the number not impress you in any way?
Another point raised was that the DLC should be purchased when they go on sale. The problem with this point is, the player is forced into arbitrary limitations and time constraints, and while it is a practice that works, it seems like a poor way out of this situation.
Lastly, majority of you guys skimmed over the price raise that occured very recently. a 1.5-2X increase across the board in many regions, without a public statement (to my knowledge, please point me in a direction if there was an announcement/explanation) is a very serious dealbreaker. As I mentioned, the price in some regions ramps up to a cost of a higher end gadget - and EU4 is NOT comparable to a higher end tech gadget, Im sorry, I love the game too and I spent an incredible amount of hours on it, but it seems ridiculous to think about it.
It is perfectly fine for a game to be designed around a smaller old time community, but would sure be really nice to get a word from Paradox on it, do you guys have any issues on your end? Is there a decrease in the number of new players at all?
You mean what Blizzard did with a subscription based game?
Sure, that's a convincing comparison -_-
You don't have to buy all the dlcs. There are plenty of people who only own the base game. When EU IV first launched it didn't have any dlc's yet people bought and enjoyed it. This mentality that I cannot play without all the dlc's is just a minor mental issue.
This is unfair but this is how the world sadly works. Paradox is based in Sweden and the price of their product is set around that fact. Living in a country with a weaker purchasing power is not that fun when compared to richer countries. For a long time I worked and lived in a country where I was a top 5% wage earner and I thought I had a very good life. Last year I moved to another country where I am a top 40% wage earner but I can afford so much more. I am basically throwing money away and living in luxury and I still manage to save a lot more than before. Food/clothing/technology/books/and plenty more stuff are much cheaper on top of the fact that salary numbers are considerably higher. I am still very puzzled trying to understand on what the people living in the richer EU countries spend their money on.
I would completely support this idea. It makes complete sense in many ways. But I imagine if they actually did that then certain people would have a very vocal hissy fit and started demanding back money for a product they have already used for 2+ years. You can't win with those people.
I don't think many would complain. And those who do... yeah you can't help those. Imagine people would complain about their 5 year old phone now being sold at half price? Nobody complains when a game is offered at 33% off only 6 months after release, and that is more shocking to me than bundling some year old game with its DLCs.
I have all DLCs and buy them whenever they come out. I think it is time to have the much older DLCs be included for free in the main game though.
It can be a turn off for many to buy something and then see that you need to pay $200+ more just to add more stuff to the game to have it be more "complete".
It can be a turn off for many to buy something and then see that you need to pay $200+ more just to add more stuff to the game to have it be more "complete".
there is a thread (38 pages) about that in the general forum, some devs have answered there.
Here, the link https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/price-increase.1022680/
Thank you, kind sir! I am not a frequent visitor on the forums, as you might have guessed...
So basically they decided that we have enough buying power based on some unclear data provided by the marketing team and increased the price. Not to say Im too happy with this course of action, obviously, as a consumer, but we know very well how marketing teams of gaming industry are just the best, right?
Sad to see that the changes are here to stay. But I guess it could have been worse, and besides, the Russian market does not bother Paradox, most likely, considering the game still does not include a Russian localisation, despite existence of a fan translation.
Sure, just completely gloss over the fact that EU4 has 300 dollars worth of DLCs
here is what I think:
Some things that not effecting gameplay a lot but making things more accesable should be added in game directly without dlc
Example: if you are not using dlc you wont see what adviser got wich talent in event screen. you need to check what it does from internet or from advisor screen in you allready got another
WHY!!! why didnt you add this to vanilla game too?
I dont like dlc policy of paradox for this
other than that? Mandate is good example of succesful dlc... things that added only by dlc are things that making game more fun. things making game easier to play are added directly into game without dlc. this is so cool! this should be done all the time if you ask me.
Some things that not effecting gameplay a lot but making things more accesable should be added in game directly without dlc
Example: if you are not using dlc you wont see what adviser got wich talent in event screen. you need to check what it does from internet or from advisor screen in you allready got another
WHY!!! why didnt you add this to vanilla game too?
I dont like dlc policy of paradox for this
other than that? Mandate is good example of succesful dlc... things that added only by dlc are things that making game more fun. things making game easier to play are added directly into game without dlc. this is so cool! this should be done all the time if you ask me.
The problem with steam reviews is that they are often completely irrelevant. Many of the negative reviews for the DLC are complaints about the free patch and many of the negative reviews for the base game are about the DLC. It isn't helpful and it just distracts from actual issues that need to be addressed.
Basically with any sort of user-submitted review system, you can only get anything meaningful if you successfully filter out all reviews that are about the writers' axe grind or other agenda, and leave in only users who are reviewing the game from a rational and critical point of view.
Axe grinding and agendas is what the internet is about, though, rational criticism not so much.
Its not about rationality. I don't mind the irrational, angry, tantrum throwing reviews as much. Sure, they are annoying to read, but at least they are somewhat relevant. Its just that so many of the reviews are completely irrelevant. Its like someone leaving a review for Civilisation 6 on the Eu4 page. I mean sure people are angry at one of the Eu4 DLC or one of the free patches, but why are they putting that review on the main game page rather than at the very least the page for that DLC?
Because they want to axe grind, not review, and there's nothing that can stop them.
This might be the most arrogant and condescending thing I've read all week
I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to.
I have all EU4 expansions and I also need to check what a certain advisor type actually gives.
To summarize, they did not add it to vanilla because they did not add** it all?
**Which, BTW, you're more than encouraged to register your game and put a suggestion for it in the relevant sub-forum.
I don't know if DLCs should be free but DLCs older than 2 years should be available at prices 80% off if they don't become free. Asking for $300 for a game and all associated DLCs is just too much, IMO.