Not a fan, but as long as it doesn't replace the option to buy individual DLC's that are of interest the no problems.
Dear God no. I'd rather pay for DLC once a year than a subscription what the f*k kind of suggestion is that. This made me feel sick.I know DLC and subscriptions aren't necessarily exclusive, but maybe an effort should be made to get away from the DLC tsunamis we've seen in EU4 and CK2?
DLC kind of gives off the impression that features are either purposefully being withheld or forcefully introduced, both for the sake of DLC sales.
One way is to make it so that subscription add the paid Money to a wallet that can be used to purchase games from paradox store. This mean you can subscribe and get access to all paradox games with all dlcs and be able to purchase a paradox game/dlc at base price every two-three months, Assuming 9.99$ subscription.
I think that would be quite fair model, the developers gains Money but the subscribers eventually get to own games just like they would have purchased them normally.
One way is to make it so that subscription add the paid Money to a wallet that can be used to purchase games from paradox store. This mean you can subscribe and get access to all paradox games with all dlcs and be able to purchase a paradox game/dlc at base price every two-three months, Assuming 9.99$ subscription.
I think that would be quite fair model, the developers gains Money but the subscribers eventually get to own games just like they would have purchased them normally.
One way is to make it so that subscription add the paid Money to a wallet that can be used to purchase games from paradox store. This mean you can subscribe and get access to all paradox games with all dlcs and be able to purchase a paradox game/dlc at base price every two-three months, Assuming 9.99$ subscription.
I think that would be quite fair model, the developers gains Money but the subscribers eventually get to own games just like they would have purchased them normally.
But that's the allure of a subscription model for me, precisely because I don't have infinite time playing, say, EU4, and often take long breaks from the PDX games, it'd be nice to just "rent" the game and all its DLC for a fortnight, or a month, and then put it aside again. That's... what subscription and rental models are for. If you need a power tool for a weekend, you don't buy it, you rent it.Absolutely not. I would not play a game under a subscription model. It might make sense if you have lots of time, but for people with busy and/or odd schedules, and for people like me who play games on and off, it just doesn't make sense.
But that's the allure of a subscription model for me, precisely because I don't have infinite time playing, say, EU4, and often take long breaks from the PDX games, it'd be nice to just "rent" the game and all its DLC for a fortnight, or a month, and then put it aside again. That's... what subscription and rental models are for. If you need a power tool for a weekend, you don't buy it, you rent it.
Also, because I'm not made of money, I'll never buy all the DLCs for CK2 or EU4 to begin with, but having the whole experience for, say, two weeks at a time could be big fun.
Also, to everyone gettkng their panties in a twist, I don't think anyone is suggesting PDX switch to a subscription model, forcing that model onto everyone.
I love how you rant for several paragraphs before you finally address, and agree with, what I said at the end of your post . Better late than never.If you have a predictable schedule and only play one game at a given time and can consistently play a single game for a month, then sure. I thought it was obvious from my post that this is not the case for me.
To use your analogy, if you need a tool once in a while over the years, it makes more sense to buy it. With the amount you spend on renting it over and over again you might spend enough to buy it several times over. It'll be cheaper to buy it and have it sit in the garage/shed until you need it again.
This is true for games as well. Say something is $15-20 for a month and you subscribe 5 times over 2 years. 2 years is enough for, say, 2 DLC, let's say median price $15. If you buy all of it, that's $40-ish for the game, then $30-ish for the DLC, for $70 total. If you subscribe, even assuming the price stays the same with DLC, then that's $75-100 for the same period of time. The more you subscribe, the more the cost difference is in favor of buying outright. And all that's assuming the "buyer" buys everything full price, on release. I almost never do. I'm usually 1-3 DLC behind in Paradox games and pick them up on sale for 33 to 50% off.
Now if you only play the game in question once a year for a month straight, then sure, subscription makes sense so long as the hypothetical yearly DLC costs more than the subscription price. I don't do that.
I love how you rant for several paragraphs before you finally address, and agree with, what I said at the end of your post . Better late than never.
No.should Paradox go for a subscription model over a DLC model?