Yes and the idiots on both sides of the argument kept derailing any serious discussion either side wanted to have, since most people cannot help but reply to horrible arguments.
Thanks Paradox! (and BTW...)
- Thread starter MrTaxman
- 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.
Well it sure would be a nice compromise but that's for PI to chose, I don't know if it wouldn't actually create more complaint but there is only one way to know.
Yeah it is their decision. But to me it sounds better than either of them. With the old model, they pretty much stopped cold when they could no longer foresee income with large expansions. With the new model, you have to give away loads of content in hopes of baiting people into a purchase and that can alienate userbases who like large expansions and dislike the many small transactions of dlc.
But with BOTH, you get large expansions, and people who still love the old games can continue to play as there may be continued content for longer periods of time. I know the very slow patches being released for EU3 right now drive me crazy, I would love this dlc model to be applied to EU3 as it might make stuff come out faster with more actual content rather than just fixes.
I am a conservative but I am also nearly dirt poor and I live in an apartment with two others so don't try to play me off as some rich privileged person. Also our discussion I believe was worthwhile as it has lead into a new realm of our discussion. I don't feel we should ban topics if we can help it because most things are worth discussing.
Come on we went over that, I couldn't be more against conservatism but that does not come into play in a videogame discussion and it is clear that it is not a random person on the internet that will make people change their view of the world be nice and let everyone have their own opinion. This is not constructive.
Do we all (all 4 of us 
) agree that expansions up front, with "big" DLC expansions toward the end might be a way to solve this dilemma? I just like to reduce arguments/solutions down occasionally to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
) agree that expansions up front, with "big" DLC expansions toward the end might be a way to solve this dilemma? I just like to reduce arguments/solutions down occasionally to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
I, respectfully, suggest you re-read the thread. This is an ideological split, not really an economic one.
Well even if JFMongrain got all righteous leftist on Zedyue he did raise the valid point of MP compatibility, how would that play out with big expansions like before?Do we all (all 4 of us
It would necessitate compatibility with the final expansion. However, those who like the DLC portion could wait until a "Complete" version came out (usually significantly cheaper) and continue from there.
I'm not sure I can explain it better than I already have. Its mostly about them declaring content free but then charging a price I would attribute to the content i unlocked by paying PLUS the content that was free. I wouldnt be mad if everyone got the 80% content free and the other for 2 dollars, and I wouldn't be mad If everyone had to pay 10 dollars for all the content. I just dislike being told I got something for free when it certainly feels like I paid for it.
and for the offtopic:
Also I said I was a conservative but I have different views on government vs economy with regards to politics. I agree that conservative politics with the economy tend to restrict individual growth, which is why I prefer a free market approach rather than a pro business approach. I just fundamentally oppose the socialist approaches where everyone is forced to share with the less fortunate because by causing there to be penalties for rising in a social ladder, you remove the incentive.
Yeah but as exposed earlier just saying wait don't work, especially if we're talking big expansion. I feel if it is impossible fro someone without all the DLCs to play with someone who does it'd be a step backward.
Frankly you are right about that. I always forget to think about that since I DON'T actually utilize multiplayer. I have no idea.
I'm pretty upset with my inability to come up with a technical solution to this, but I don't have access to paradox's tools. I wish there was a way for people to play MP with separate versions with the old model. It works SO WELL for singleplayer release (in my head at least)
You obviously didn't read our whole rant on that, and I can't blame you for that, but you must know that I'm far from being a conservative and apart from the MP issue which I didn't think about, I already raised a lot of point for the new systeem.
I'm really, really confused as to why people are talking about altruism or socialism here.
Some 80% of the new content in 1.6 is exclusive to muslim rulers - sure, it might exist in the game files of people who didn't pay for Swords of Islam, but the AI having to fret about decadence doesn't really matter much to Christian rulers, beyond maybe making the AI a bit more aggressive when they have stray dynasty members laying about.
It's less like buying three loaves of bread and giving away two, and more like buying three loaves of bread and giving away betamax tapes. Sure, you're giving people free stuff, but does it really matter to you if it isn't incentivizing free riding?
Some 80% of the new content in 1.6 is exclusive to muslim rulers - sure, it might exist in the game files of people who didn't pay for Swords of Islam, but the AI having to fret about decadence doesn't really matter much to Christian rulers, beyond maybe making the AI a bit more aggressive when they have stray dynasty members laying about.
It's less like buying three loaves of bread and giving away two, and more like buying three loaves of bread and giving away betamax tapes. Sure, you're giving people free stuff, but does it really matter to you if it isn't incentivizing free riding?
I can't figure it out but I figured out that I still don't like the new model. It allows for compatible mp games but by it's nature it restricts the devs from selling big releases such as with HttT and DW because huge mechanics and map changes would need to be universal through all users. This trends downwards towards dlc away from large releases, if they want to do a large 25 dollar release, they will have to do the same as with a 10 or 2 dollar release, give out most of the core changes for free and hope lots of people buy it. For the Muslim DLC that is one thing, but it's riskier for a larger release that they could run the risk of not getting their money back.
They don't want or plan to release big expansions because of the afore mentioned reasons. The biggest hurdle I see is how they improve the Byzantines and other Orthodox empires while keeping things compatible.
They talked about their post-release plans in dev diary iirc. The feedback in EU3 was pretty one sided - the large expansions made for disjointed communities and excessive cost when you might only want one of the later expansions. It also sucks hardcore when you don't buy an expansion and all support for your game comes to a halt.