The DLC vs EXPANSION dilemma now shows its core problem...

[Tyson_48]

At this point i think we can see, that it was a tragic long term mistake of PDX to change the addon/expansion/dlc policy!

While I really do believe the intention of PDX was to satisfy all customers, it now leads to exact these problems I (and many others) had mentioned...

I remember a couple of years ago, when there was a discussion about it, the goal was to add things and features to everyone and get some "special features" you have to pay for.
In the review it is easy to say, that this decision would lead to a pointy end.
First it was CK2 when PDX added these new dlc-policy.

You want to play a christian feudal lord, fine <-> You want to play as muslim, buy dlc.
At this point it was quite fair and easy to understand.
Later on more and more complex game features were created and I do understand, that it was impossible to release this all in free patches.
While PDX is a very customer friendly company, it is still a company.
So dlc after dlc went more difficult to maintain the balance between free stuff and valuable content, people would pay for.
In a long term review I really lost which feature of CK2 was free and which was part of any of the numerous dlc I bought...and i think I am not the only one...

Later i tried to get into EUIV, which i really was hyped for.
My greatest problem was, what should i buy before start playing?
There were so many different features and content dlc...finally i just spend about a few hours in this game and invested more time in forum research which dlc would fit my play-style.
In the end i stopped playing it and got back to EUIII.

I am really afraid HoI4 will receive a similar destiny.
When i look into this game, there are so much great fundamental changes to HoI3 in the base concept, which i really like. The whole "vision" of the game is so much better than before.
It is so much promising to become the very best PDX title and WW2-game ever made.
When you look into the eyes @podcat of the early development videos, you can see with how much enthusiasm and love for details he was on this game...
But the result all in all at this stage of the development of this game is, that i am afraid many of this really cool basics will die out because PDX is forced to release in every dlc some "new features" people will be willing to pay instead of improving and finalising the base and core mechanics and features.

I know the policy seems to be set in stone, but i am still convinced it would be a better way to patch this game to a proper state and THEN release ONE (and later perhaps another one) really big 30€-EXPANSION instead of several smaller compromise-dlc-patch-hybrids...

It really made me a bit sad to see the evolution in this forums.
More and more overheated threads appear about problems, which are only problems because of this policy change...

 

[ashbery76]

I think the problem is the game are lasting too long.Ck2 should have been but to sleep a long time ago.The expansions are just bloating the great out of the game.EU4 also needs to rest.

 

[Demosthenest]

I think the problem is the game are lasting too long.Ck2 should have been but to sleep a long time ago.The expansions are just bloating the great out of the game.EU4 also needs to rest.

What? No way. EU4 is perfectly fine to play and expand right now. CK2 has never been better.

 

[Tyson_48]

What? No way. EU4 is perfectly fine to play and expand right now. CK2 has never been better.

But the main difference between CK2-dlc's and EUIV-dlc's is, that in CK2 most of the (first released) dlc does not affect me, if i stay on the main route in the game...while EUIV seems to improve overall in the base game...

To play CK2 for example as a HRE-lord or in Britain, France, Italy, etc. you mostly have the same game experience with or without all the dlc.
In EUIV you have a fundamental difference no matter your play-style...

 

[am300307]

What? No way. EU4 is perfectly fine to play and expand right now. CK2 has never been better.

Victoria is a much better game than EU and CK...

 

[paulatreides0]

No thank you, I like their business model the way it is now.

An average DLC will add enough dynamism to keep the game going for at least several dozen more hours. Usually it's more in the hundreds of hours. That's a disgustingly good deal by any metric, especially when the vast majority of games on the market even the great ones only give you half an hour to two hours of play per dollar invested. In terms of cost-per-game-hour, EUIV, CK2, and HoI have the best ratios of any game I've played.

The games get significantly better with each patch with a fair bit more content to play with, be it big or small. It also means I don't have to wait half a decade (if we are rather optimistic) or more to enjoy more content in a series I like.

Expansion may sound better on paper, but in actual application, expansions have never been able to drive as much progress as the current model. HoI III, Victoria II, and EU III all had expansion-based models, and in terms of both patches and features added through expansions, they pale in comparison to what CK2 and EUIV has added. The add-on DLC model is just much more dynamic and flexible and far more able to respond to consumer demand and opinion.

Victoria is a much better game than EU and CK...

They are completely incomparable games. It's like saying LoL is better than Starcraft. Victoria has a very, very different from focus from those two and those two could never properly model what they are trying to model if they adopted the Vicky model - in fact, it would just make them worse at doing what they want to do.

At most you can say that Victoria is a game that you enjoy more, because you enjoy the things that Victoria models. But then that's not an issue of Vicky being a better game, it's an issue of you thinking that Vicky has a more enjoyable time period. So it's a completely meaningless subjective preference. I'm fairly certain if Vicky II had received the same kind of add-on model as CK II and EU IV it would be a significantly better game now than it was on AHD release.

 

[BBBD316]

Vicky 2 is the bees knees!

I think the big thing is the battleplanner is considered base game and hence having to pay for a base game extension rubs people up the wrong way. Had they made it a free feature and then noted that the there was a paid new NF's for the Commonwealth nations I think it would be more acceptable.

With the other games each DLC was easier as it was adding a completely new feature or refining game play with a new mechanic, as there is less of these in the game it will be harder to sell these changes to existing users

 

[Zunik]

I think the big thing is the battleplanner is considered base game and hence having to pay for a base game extension rubs people up the wrong way. Had they made it a free feature and then noted that the there was a paid new NF's for the Commonwealth nations I think it would be more acceptable.

With the other games each DLC was easier as it was adding a completely new feature or refining game play with a new mechanic, as there is less of these in the game it will be harder to sell these changes to existing users

Spot on! I also think announcing a paid DLC this early after release was risky from a marketing standpoint (I don't count the month of july since basically all the team was off for much deserved vacations). We could've used a 1.3 patch with a few top-priority fixes to stabilize gameplay before they start asking players to pay more for new features - you don't start planing addons on a burning house...

I sometimes truly feel sorry for the devs reading all the negative posts on these forums but one would think they would've learned a lot about how critical the few months following release are to their player base by now.

 

[BBBD316]

Well yes, annoucing huge free changes and then some NF's perhaps a wunderwaffe DLC would have gone better.

 

[Meglok]

I know the policy seems to be set in stone, but i am still convinced it would be a better way to patch this game to a proper state and THEN release ONE (and later perhaps another one) really big 30€-EXPANSION instead of several smaller compromise-dlc-patch-hybrids...

Completely agree. PDS still has not fixed many of the broken and sub-optimal features of HOI4 (Pacific War anyone?) and they are already trying to charge for "content" that in many eyes is fixing a major design flaw. I was very surprised at the volume and ferocity of the complaints from customers to today's diary. Pretty obvious that many people are fed up.

PDS needs to concentrate on making the existing game function in a rational and more intelligent manner. No one expects a genius level AI, but we do expect an AI that does not commit idiotic suicidal mistakes.

 

[adam_grif]

PDS needs to concentrate on making the existing game function in a rational and more intelligent manner. No one expects a genius level AI, but we do expect an AI that does not commit idiotic suicidal mistakes.

They are continuing to work on the AI, and will be shipping free improvements along with this new DLC. They previously stated that they would be putting some focus on the war in the pacific and the AI's passivity therein, about 2 dev diaries ago. They also today mentioned that the AI is now better at noticing and fighting its way out of encirclements in the upcoming build. And with the Blitz command, it will also be better at creating them, thus putting up more of a fight against players.

 

[Johan]

These days, our expansions are about 3-4 times as big as the ones with the previous models..

We also add bugfixes and features for free..


And you guys seem to like this model far more.. At least when it comes to actually paying for it, and playing it.

 

[Galleblære]

The current DLC model is superior to the old expansion one. In the past, the "base game" was essentially abandoned when the expansion was released, often with serious issues still needing fixing (HoI3 for example)

That said, the frequency of DLC released and patching can be a problem too. With CK2 major patches seemed to coincide with new DLC releases. However, the new DLCs seemed to introduce new issues, so we seemed to be in a never ending spiral of lingering issues and need for patches.

The reason why The Reapers Due for Crusader Kings is a success is that it fixed long lingering problems with the CK2 base game, and it seems to be a stable release. IMO, the game should be properly patched and stable before a new DLC with potential issues is released. So I certainly see the OPs concern when it comes to frequency of DLC releases. Make DLCs less frequent, but larger in scope perhaps?

 

[Number 7]

These days, our expansions are about 3-4 times as big as the ones with the previous models..

We also add bugfixes and features for free..


And you guys seem to like this model far more.. At least when it comes to actually paying for it, and playing it.

You and the EU4 team happen to do a really good job on the expansions and the base game imo... not the case for HOI4's team. the paid blitz thing in a WW2 game is just really low. the AI doesn't work properly, the game is just not healthy. Please johan, take over development of HOI4 for a while

 

[nuarbnellaffej]

I know there has been a lot of heated debate about this subject, but I am grateful that paradox continues improving on their games long after release, even if that means buying expansions and dlc's. Not like total war games where you buy one, game is mediocre and they release another game while the one you Bought is still fresh.

I am currently on hiatus from HOI IV until the AI is good enough to enable a fun game against, but I do have hope for the future. I'm not the kind of guy to get too upset over "principal" as long as I get a good game(eventually, not suggesting that is okay, but I'm not boycotting over it).

 

[Mabs]

im fine with it as is.

. not the case for HOI4's team. the paid blitz thing in a WW2 game is just really low.

thats a quality of life feature, to save you having to fiddle.. essentially a shortcut, it doesnt add anything new to the game. so whats the problem ?

 

[nuarbnellaffej]

thats a quality of life feature, to save you having to fiddle.. essentially a shortcut, it doesnt add anything new to the game. so whats the problem ?

I can see why people would feel slighted, but I will most likely buy the expansions regardless of that. I'm not trying to white wash these issues, but for this genre paradox is like the only serious player, so..

 

[grandad1982]

You and the EU4 team happen to do a really good job on the expansions and the base game imo... not the case for HOI4's team. the paid blitz thing in a WW2 game is just really low. the AI doesn't work properly, the game is just not healthy. Please johan, take over development of HOI4 for a while

As I understand it Johan is involved in all the projects anyway. It's not like everyone and every team in pds operate in a vacuum.

I agree that the Blittz fearure feels like a basic improvement to a core feature and should probably not be a DLC feature. However I see some people acting like the fact a DLC is in development means that many of the problems with the game won't get worked on whereas we all know that isn't true. Just look at the patch notes for any of the major patches in the last few years!

Ultimately if hoi4 is making you feel sad or angry then step away from it. It's a game and if it's not making you enjoy yourself and having the opposite effect, stop! After all its sole purpose is to entertain you. Play something else, do something else and maybe come back later to see how things have changed. I know some people will say 'but I paid for this....', you need to decide the yourselves where the line is crossed for value for money, for me its been crossed long since and is now about 40p an hours play and considering a pint cost £4 or mire where I live that seems amazingly good to me.

 

[Mannstien]

These days, our expansions are about 3-4 times as big as the ones with the previous models..

We also add bugfixes and features for free..


And you guys seem to like this model far more.. At least when it comes to actually paying for it, and playing it.

It's time to call in the zombies Johan, HOI4 needs so many fixes to the base bud we can't tell what's worth the paid versus the fix axe.

 

[rcbricker33]

I got blasted to hell and back in the DD for stating this, the Blitz feature was never stated as something the BP was supposed to do. As such this Blitz is not a fix it is a new BP feature.

I am not stating that because I believe that PDx should charge for it. I believe that PDx can charge for what ever they like. If I do not believe that the DLC is worth the money, I wont buy it (who am I kidding...I always end up buying all the DLC anyway - except the music and sprites don't care about those).

I will say this though and I suggest others do the same. Take the cost of the game and divide it by the number of hours you have played the game...now tell me when exactly did you get so much entertainment per hour for such a low cost? I have played and "beaten" too many games in so short a time that the cost/hour ratio made me feel like I needed more. I enjoyed those games but at $6 or $7 per hour it just felt light. Why? Because of PDx. I am currently running a ratio of $0.25. I mean really! So the game cant suck too bad!