Of course I have control over whether or not to spend my money on DLC. What a terribly clever thing to say.
- 2
- 1
The DLC vs EXPANSION dilemma now shows its core problem...
- Thread starter Tyson_48
- 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.
- Status
Of course I have control over whether or not to spend my money on DLC. What a terribly clever thing to say.
Yeah because no one has ever gone broke on drugs.
Why do you not understand economics and capitalism?
Even Ludwig von Mises says youre wrong. People will spend outrageous amounts of money on things that the price is not rooted in an realistic value. Thats what Karl Marx called "surplus value".
What motivates people to purchase things, is not reason, but desire. Desire is not controlled by ration. Rational people are rarely consumers. Its not rational to consume things which are more expensive than input+labor. We do, because people are not driven by needs, but by desires.
These people are, in gaming terms, called "whales".
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/195806/chasing_the_whale_examining_the_.php?print=1
"For around six months following this discovery, Chris found himself draining his bank account until he didn't have a spare dollar to his name -- all for a selection of pixels that would hopefully be wrapped in a purple glow.
"My savings got wiped out pretty quickly -- although it should be noted that at the time I didn't have much put away to begin with," he explains. "The real trouble wasn't that it cleaned out my bank account, but that it put me in a really delicate situation. With no savings and every dollar not spent on food, shelter, or utilities going to digital hats, any unexpected expense became a really big deal."
Chris even had a few health scares along the way, and found that he couldn't afford to pay the medical bills because his savings account had been stripped for TF2 money.
"It got so bad that at one point Steam actually blocked my credit card, thinking I was some sort of account scammer, and I had to open a support ticket to tell them, 'No, that really is me spending whatever savings I have on this stupid game with fake hats.'" he says. "And like any addicted user, my social element didn't help -- most of my outside-of-work contacts were people I just played TF2 with. At work I just wanted to be uncrating things, and when I was uncrating things I just wanted to see better results."
Want to try again?
- 1
- 1
I wouldn't mind those things, but I would like if things are what they are, that Paradox would at least include the following versions of products for sale:
Gold Package: which encompass the entire game + all existing DLC + discount.
Platinum Package: entire game + all future content at a single price
Silver Package: upgrades the gold package to the platinum package.
Creators need to be paid, but it might anger some people that they need to constantly take their wallet out. Some people simply prefer the experience of buying a game and having a game instead of having to constantly to pay for having the game up to date with all the features.
Therefore you might consider a platinum package for those people.
Through micro-management of your armies after initializing your high-level BP. Even old men can do this.
My recommendation is to not purchase the game + DLC's all in one go. I never do that unless there is a big, I mean huge, sale going on. But I generally buy the base game not long after release, and pick and choose my DLC's that I want.
It's the same old argument, and I understand. Those who don't have a ton of money have limitations and that can be annoying. Those without a money limitation are not so concerned. It doesn't mean that we are ignorant of the value of money. We just don't have money pressures as strong as some others.
Those the have increased money pressures will by necessity have to be more circumspect in their purchases. Those with less money pressures can be more liberal in what they purchase.
Everyone is appreciative of your complaints, but don't expect Paradox to adopt a socialist approach to game pricing.
- 2
While I agree that the Blitz command as DLC is causing a bit of a keyboard itch it's not like it's not possible to do with the current battle-planner (I do so basically ever time). You just have to make multiple staged offensive-lines and use the TAB key to connect them or the specific front-line will just bloat out across the map (just like in the pictures).
That said I would much rather see that they fixed the logic behind it than to make it a paid DLC feature. The army/corps "border" discussed in other threads would've been a much more elegant solution to the problem and could've been added as a larger OOB DLC (since there's a lot of people who've wished for something akin to a proper OOB).
What gets me is that the most effective way to use a BP is to make a pointless one for brevity's sake, then wait for the bonus to stack, and then DELETING the Battle Plan. lol.
Its just an annoying system to gain a 50% bonus. Thats it. Ive never used the bloody thing once other than to get a bonus for microing.
Its just an annoying system to gain a 50% bonus. Thats it. Ive never used the bloody thing once other than to get a bonus for microing.
- 1
- 1
Heck, I didn't even bother to do that with my armor, I just micro'd them without bothering. Figured the AI needed the crutch, and that worked fine. But then 1.2.1 came out with this AI front management bug and I have literally thrown up my hands. When Germany, Italy, or Russia just completely abandons a front it makes it hard to play the game. And there is nothing I can seem do to fix this thru modding or console commands.
- 2
Nope, they have to fix the strat redeploying and front management on their end. Theirs been a ton of savegames sent.
Sadly, if the BP system didnt exist at all, the AI is really only bad at templates and production, which can be fixed (and has been in mods). The AI changes its plans as often as it changes its templates, and alot of the times its right before or right after war is declared. For Germany who declares alot of wars its just insanely bad.
Ive walked to Berlin with no opposition more times than I care to count. Ive shelved the game for a while in SP and just play MP with my friends. BP bonus is more useful in MP.
Russia is bad two because of the two fronts and size of Russia...all of a sudden Timenshenko decides the entire western front would look snazzier in the far east, then changes his mind halfway across siberia when Moscow is falling.
Sadly, if the BP system didnt exist at all, the AI is really only bad at templates and production, which can be fixed (and has been in mods). The AI changes its plans as often as it changes its templates, and alot of the times its right before or right after war is declared. For Germany who declares alot of wars its just insanely bad.
Ive walked to Berlin with no opposition more times than I care to count. Ive shelved the game for a while in SP and just play MP with my friends. BP bonus is more useful in MP.
Russia is bad two because of the two fronts and size of Russia...all of a sudden Timenshenko decides the entire western front would look snazzier in the far east, then changes his mind halfway across siberia when Moscow is falling.
Actually, that term predates computer gaming. It originates in the casino industry (and for a very good reason, as we shall see in a minute).
But your post seems to assume that the entire gaming community is composed of whales. This is simply not true. If it was, we wouldn't be having this conversation because both of one of us would be logged into Star Trek Online, feeding it dollars to buy keys to open boxes. Yet, here am I, doing no such thing. (You can repeat this exercise with any game that has a system of randomized drops you can pay money to increment, like the Retro bags in The Secret World.)
A percentage of any gaming community might match this profile, but no where near 100%. Then again, a percentage of the gambling community are composed of addicts who spend a large percentage of their income on games of chance at their casino. No one would say the entire gambling community is composed of people who spend their entire paychecks at casinos.
- 1
Doesn't this depend on your theory of value? What are you using?
As for that poor "whale," there are various "rational addiction" models kicking around. I kind of like the ones that treat it as a discounting problem, myself.
I'm the initial poster of the images.
After some testing the green/red advancement indicators still seem to be totally divorced from what actually happens, however I was at fault for the retarded behavior of my spearhead. I was (and usually am) utilising the aggressive stance on my army, which apparently causes it to ignore the battleplan completely and advance in any and all directions
Switching the army to the regular stance causes it to push more aggressively for the actual plan objectives and not spread out completely, at least as far as small scale spearheads in poland go.
I have now revised my opinion on the blitz feature, from bug fix that shouldn't need to be payed for, to pointless additional button that isn't worth paying for. (slight hyperbole, it still awaits further testing)
Thanks for forcing me to investigate this further and opening my eyes to the truth.
Further analysis indicates that having multiple front lines within the same army is the leading cause of front line overlap; utilising multiple armies and avoiding the aggressive stance significantly reduces overlap and general silly behaviour.
I'll stop posting about in this thread, since it isn't exactly ontopic.
I haven't touched HOi4 in months, but seeing those images of the battle planner gave me the worst anxiety haha. Never felt like it worked well at all.
It has been mentioned in this thread, but I think the problem with the business model comes into focus when a bad egg appears. HOI4 still seems to be in awful shape, but I guess they can't afford to fix it without bringing in some extra revenue.
I'm pretty pessimistic about its future.
- 1
I love the current DLC-policy. I have never had longer-lasting fun with games than with EU4 and I hope the same will be the case with HoI4.
Although I have to say that I am concerned with the decision to declare a vital core feature like the addition of the battle planner as a paid feature. I won't be affected by it, but in my opinion this is not in consent with the previous decision-making when it comes to the question what to have your customers pay for.
Although I have to say that I am concerned with the decision to declare a vital core feature like the addition of the battle planner as a paid feature. I won't be affected by it, but in my opinion this is not in consent with the previous decision-making when it comes to the question what to have your customers pay for.
- 3
- 1
Apparently you haven't tried playing the release version of RTW2 and today's version...
I think dlc's & expansions have potential of destroying games, if not well implemented it will ruin the multiplayer of many games easely as it wil decimate the player base it needs to be succesfull. Wich is why free to play multiplayer as WOT & WOW became so populair & also why Sega made an attempt for a free to play game.
Blizzard has a good expansion policy for multiplayer I found, big decent expansions & players without expansions were still able to play. Too many dlc's just shows that the company is milking its fanbase imao.
Personally I just want value for my money, which is why i m disgusted by the dlc policy invented by the marketeers that came into the gaming industry. They turned an industry based on craftmanship into an industry that abused consumer trust by releasing half ass games early (or letting consumer pay for testing their game: alpha acces) & forcing players to pay for fixing them with something they called a dlc. Or they just chopped a finished product in pieces and let consumers pay for overpriced small pieces that they called dlcs.
Blizzard has a good expansion policy for multiplayer I found, big decent expansions & players without expansions were still able to play. Too many dlc's just shows that the company is milking its fanbase imao.
Personally I just want value for my money, which is why i m disgusted by the dlc policy invented by the marketeers that came into the gaming industry. They turned an industry based on craftmanship into an industry that abused consumer trust by releasing half ass games early (or letting consumer pay for testing their game: alpha acces) & forcing players to pay for fixing them with something they called a dlc. Or they just chopped a finished product in pieces and let consumers pay for overpriced small pieces that they called dlcs.
Last edited:
- 1
Yes this dlc-policy worked very well for CK2
But i slightly doubt it can be used similiar with HoI4.
In CK2 it was easy:
Base game
Play a christian feudal lord in the age of the crusades.
Nearly ALL other important content for this was added in free patches, which was and is a really cool and customer friendly policy of PDX.
Of course this was economically only possible because:
- You want to play a muslim -> buy DLC
- You want to play a republic -> buy DLC
- You want to play in viking age -> buy DLC
- You want a Charlemagne story -> buy DLC
...
THIS WAS / IS PERFECTLY FAIR FOR ALL AND GRANT A VAST BOOST OF INCOME FOR PDX AND SO MADE THE FREE-PATCHES POSSIBLE!
Sadly this policy didn't work as well with EUIV, because now it was not only ADDITIONAL CONTENT in the DLC's but improvements for the base game.
And in HOI4 it seems and i am afraid it will get even worse!
In HoI4 the problem is, that from the beginning they wanted EVERYTHING FOR ALL.
Although it would have been a break with previous HoI-titles, I think it would have been better they had used a similiar system like in CK2.
For example:
Base game
Only playable as GER / US / SOV / GB
(BUT ALL ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT AND CONTENT FOR THIS BASE GAME AS FREE PATCHES)
To finance this:
AXIS-PACK DLC $9,99
- Play as any historical Axis-nation (including Spain) and sprites etc.
- unique NF etc. for these nations
- flavour stuff
ALLY-PACK DLC $14,99
like the Axis-Pack +
- internal commonwealth mechanism
- enhanced lend and lease system in Allys
- partisan/sabotage system
- enhanced politics / elections
COMMUNIST-PACK DLC $14,99
like Axis +
- internal communist economy
- big CHI package
SANDBOX / MINOR DLC $9,99
Lead the glorious nations like Switzerland, Argentina, Mexico etc. to world dominance
- unique events to boost these nations into warmonging Hitlers
ROAD TO WAR DLC $9,99
Will you turn GER/ITA/etc. into a democratic reforms or will the US turn into a fascist monster (like today) through the great depression
- earlier start date with full setup 1930
- more improved political systems
NUCLEAR DEVASTATION $19,99
- enhanced timeline to 1965 with full tech upgrade
- after war diplomacy with peace events
- COLD WAR MECHANIC
THIS WOULD IMO A GOOD AND ECONOMIC POLICY TO PRESS OUT VAST SUMS OF MONEY FROM THE SERIES AND SUPPORT THE BASE GAME!
@podcat @Johan
You are welcome to develop all this dlc's and i will buy them
- 6
- 4
- 1
Agree, it shouldn't have to be said.
Seriously, though, if your complaint is the conent or pricing of a DLC, fair enough, but when people gripe about how PDX makes DLCs to begin with, those people do need reminding that no one is actually forced to buy said DLCs.
- 1
Finally someone brave enough to say the truth! Hearts of Iron is a dangerous Drug! I know I got hooked on HoI 3 and I am slowing transitioning to HOI IV.
Warning to All players overdose's can be dangerous. Make sure you sleep 2 hours every other day & stop playing for 30 min each day to eat something!
This will now mean Paradox will need heavy government regulations.
Everyone loves the Total war DLC style of only 4 playable nations at launch and DLC from day 1 to unlock anyone else right?.......
Please can we not go down that route.
Please can we not go down that route.
- 2
- 1
Yes this dlc-policy worked very well for CK2
But i slightly doubt it can be used similiar with HoI4.
In CK2 it was easy:
Base game
Play a christian feudal lord in the age of the crusades.
Nearly ALL other important content for this was added in free patches, which was and is a really cool and customer friendly policy of PDX.
Of course this was economically only possible because:
- You want to play a muslim -> buy DLC
- You want to play a republic -> buy DLC
- You want to play in viking age -> buy DLC
- You want a Charlemagne story -> buy DLC
...
THIS WAS / IS PERFECTLY FAIR FOR ALL AND GRANT A VAST BOOST OF INCOME FOR PDX AND SO MADE THE FREE-PATCHES POSSIBLE!
Sadly this policy didn't work as well with EUIV, because now it was not only ADDITIONAL CONTENT in the DLC's but improvements for the base game.
And in HOI4 it seems and i am afraid it will get even worse!
In HoI4 the problem is, that from the beginning they wanted EVERYTHING FOR ALL.
Although it would have been a break with previous HoI-titles, I think it would have been better they had used a similiar system like in CK2.
For example:
Base game
Only playable as GER / US / SOV / GB
(BUT ALL ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT AND CONTENT FOR THIS BASE GAME AS FREE PATCHES)
To finance this:
AXIS-PACK DLC $9,99
- Play as any historical Axis-nation (including Spain) and sprites etc.
- unique NF etc. for these nations
- flavour stuff
ALLY-PACK DLC $14,99
like the Axis-Pack +
- internal commonwealth mechanism
- enhanced lend and lease system in Allys
- partisan/sabotage system
- enhanced politics / elections
COMMUNIST-PACK DLC $14,99
like Axis +
- internal communist economy
- big CHI package
SANDBOX / MINOR DLC $9,99
Lead the glorious nations like Switzerland, Argentina, Mexico etc. to world dominance
- unique events to boost these nations into warmonging Hitlers
ROAD TO WAR DLC $9,99
Will you turn GER/ITA/etc. into a democratic reforms or will the US turn into a fascist monster (like today) through the great depression
- earlier start date with full setup 1930
- more improved political systems
NUCLEAR DEVASTATION $19,99
- enhanced timeline to 1965 with full tech upgrade
- after war diplomacy with peace events
- COLD WAR MECHANIC
THIS WOULD IMO A GOOD AND ECONOMIC POLICY TO PRESS OUT VAST SUMS OF MONEY FROM THE SERIES AND SUPPORT THE BASE GAME!
@podcat @Johan
You are welcome to develop all this dlc's and i will buy them
This is probably the worst DLC policy out there, only beaten by FPS games 4 map 2 guns DLCs. The current EU IV DLC system is 100 times better then the Total War's sh*t day one faction DLC's and other faction or unit DLCs that they make. Why the hell would I want to pay to play other countries? I don't want your idea of additional content WHICH WAS CUT OUT OF THE BASE GAME 'COUSE WE DO IT LATTER AND THEN GET MONEY FOR IT.
I believe that improving the game is far better choice for both developer/publisher, buyer alike. Getting payed for something that you worked on for hundreds of hours feels much more satisfying then giving it away for free and then get payed for something that is really almost not comperable to those hundreds of hours. I'm not saying that there should be no free improvements to the game other then bug fixes. I'm saying there should be no payed DLC that could have been possible to fit in the game at launch just to get free updates which should be payed for. That is a clear path to falling into monthly DLC pack of stupid things like: Culture DLCs, oh you want to play a west slavic nation? then buy the west slavic pack to play with them. This would have ruined EU IV while it or something that at the surface is somewhat alike have been working for CKII. Not every game can handle certain DLC policies. HoI in my opinion could not handle your DLC ideas (last one is clearly to push them to make a Cold War game not Vic3). Any game that offers choices to limited amount of nations is a bad DLC, of course there could be reasons which can justify it for example Prussian monarchy being prussian yet its a free patch, why? you ask and the answer is 'couse they know it is not something that can be charged.
HoI DLC policy should be something similar to EU IV not necessarily the same. I would not buy any of your DLCs since it works only for a selected number of countries in a grand strategy game which is bad. If there would be a "Freedom pack" that gives every democratic countries (even if they reformed into it from other goverment type) new options and might as well some other to great power or even unique ones to historically important and democratic nations (USA, GB, FR), I would buy something like this.
- Status