The Vicky Franchise

[lizardo]

Most games have been designed as a one off and then maybe some enhancements or a sequel.

Could we begin to look at Vicky as an ongoing phenomena with a paying fan base? This would encourage more regular and predictable development and, more importantly to Paradox, a more regular and predictable income.

Instead of something that is put on a shelf and consumed, Vicky (and for that matter EU/HOI) is an ongoing involvement.

In marketing one of the holy grails is to get into a subscription mode with your customer. Let's try that here. And together we can evolve a really great game.

When there's questions as to if Vicky will evolve or die off it kind of dries up interest. Being able to be a part of the evolution of a pretty decent game entity is very attractive.

 

[marshman]

what?

 

[Earl Uhtred]

How is that different to what we've already got?

 

[lizardo]

It would be different by being a deliberate strategy and by having an entry price and a regular subscription.

So rather than waiting to pay 40$ for a product that may or may not materialize and have absolutely no incentive for incremental improvement you pay a certain amount yearly for Vicky service.

What you get is the assurance, reasonable assurance, that your favorite game doesn't go the way of many of your past favorite games. Anyone remember Imperialism, Master of Magic and Capitalism? Great games all abandoned mainly because the risk was too high to invest in sequels and no cash flow to fund and incentivevize support and evolution.

Fans can scream for more and better Vicky but Paradox isn't getting paid for support and to invest in producing episodic Vicky is risky. At the end of all the screaming are there actual buyers?

Structuring Vicky as a ongoing continuous enterprise supported by subscription makes sense if you want to be sure that the product will continue to be supported and improve.

Also, in a shameless plug, I run a company in Prague that can do programming at a third the cost of Norway or US. Happy to move development here. :rofl:

 

[rjf101]

As a paying customer I definately do NOT want them to charge monthly to play Victoria. First of all, monthly payments do not go with this sort of game. They go with "MMORPGs", interenet games were you can only play multiplayer. Victoria is mostly played as single'player. Secondly, they may turn away many customers who either refuse to, or simply cannot, pay a mnthly subscription fee. I personally would not buy it at all if this was done. Many loyal fans I'm sure would not.

If they need to make money off of their games continually, they simply need to advertise more. I didn't know there was a Paradox Interactive, or a Victoria, Europa Universalis, or Hearts of Iron until I accidentally stumbled over Victoria on the internet. Now, if they actually did some advertising, people would continually buy their games, and they would have a continual cash flow to rley on. No need for more sequels, no need for subscrptions.

 

[unmerged(56465)]

I don't think Victoria has the potential for perpetual expansion that a subscription based game would require, unlike perhaps the RPGs that are peddling their DLC nowadays.

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Every Paradox title I own is played in short bursts separated by a year or more, with the exception of EU3, some version of which I play every three months or so. Monthly subscription is completely inappropriate for this sort of game.

 

[Andrelvis]

Every Paradox title I own is played in short bursts separated by a year or more

Same here.

 

[Lloyien]

Every Paradox title I own is played in short bursts separated by a year or more, with the exception of EU3, some version of which I play every three months or so. Monthly subscription is completely inappropriate for this sort of game.

+1.

Lizardo, if Paradox even so much as hinted at desiring this kind of strategy for their games, the fan base would turn on them faster than the speed of sound. It just isn't a viable option for this kind of game.

 

[Vladislav]

If I were a billionaire, I would help Paradox finance the development of the Vicky franchise with millions of dollars. Unfortunately, I can't support the kind of philanthropy the OP is suggesting.

 

[lizardo]

No, not like a web based game, that's a whole separate scheme.

Nor pay to play, you buy you Vicky you got your Vicky.

But funding the evolution and support is another matter. Paradox doesn't make any money supporting Vicky or improving it. They have to risk all on a 'new' game every so often or the whole thing dies of financial starvation.

One alternative is to turn the game over to an 'open source' group of volunteer supporters. I'm not sure how viable that is or if they'd want to deal with all the issues.

But if we want the game to survive and evolve then we need a dependable mechanism. Or at some point the show's over. Then we're left with the game in what ever state it's in and slowly, or quickly, it moves to game limbo.

Another problem with the episodic approach is that in order to fund the new version investors have to be impressed with the latest 'wow' graphics or gizmos, or it's a new team that doesn't get it and changes the game. There's this temptation to go beyond the fundamental aspects of the game that were successful and razzel dazzel.

This was the problem going from Capitalism Plus to Cap II, they lost the game in the marketing razzal dazzal.

What I'd like to see instead is an improvement path that leads into the future. I'm willing to pay for that. If 1000 people paid 10$ a year that's a pretty strong financial signal to continue development. The guy who only wants to pay 40$ for an off the shelf game fix and forget can do that too.

It's an idea.

We get these haphazard fixes and updates and it isn't really something we can depend on, or sometimes clearly understand where the game is at. I think if put some money on the table Paradox would have an incentive to provide real support.

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Then, again - how is it so different from the status quo?

We buy a game, developers no doubt take notice of the 'buzz' and certainly of the sales, it spawns a number of patches and 1-3 expansions depending on demand over the next 3 years or so, rinse and repeat.

 

[PlacidDragon]

Vicky, like any of the other Paradox title series (EU, HoI), will generate addons and sequels based on popularity. Vicky was not very popular (on a grand scale), but the fanbase is "rabid" enough for Paradox to take a chance on creating a sequel (a sequel that Paradox's CEO has bet his hair wont even break even financially). If Vicky 2 "fails", we wont be seeing Vicky 3 in a looong time, if ever. If it is a glowing success, a third installment of the series would likely take its place in the development list alongside the inevitable EU 4, HoI 4, etc.

Any kind of "subscription" plan sounds stupid beyond belief in all honesty. This is not an MMO, this is (primarily) a singleplayer grand strategy game. The vast majority of fans and potential buyers would tell the respective company to stick it where the sun doesnt shine.

 

[unmerged(44030)]

Paradox doesn't make any money supporting Vicky or improving it.

Um... Yes, they do. If the game is bugged at release, people will wait for patches before buying the game.

And having this reputation as a game company that supports its games long time after the release is also good. For many other games it's more like this: "It's bugged so I can forget this game, since they're not going to fix it anyway." Even if Paradox Interactive's patches are not always successes, they are still doing their best. And just the fact that they actually want to improve their games even after the release is quite amazing.

 

[Red_Communist]

Um... Yes, they do. If the game is bugged at release, people will wait for patches before buying the game.

And having this reputation as a game company that supports it games long time after the release is also good. For many other games its like this: "It's bugged, I can forget this game, since they're not going to fix it anyway." Even if Paradox Interactive's patches are not always successes, they are still doing their best. And just the fact that they actually want to improve their games even after the release is quite amazing.

Well said.

I'm actually quite surprised that Paradox does this. All the other gaming companies I see just say "screw it... who cares at lease we made money". Paradox is the exact opposite.

Thank you Paradox for being dedicated to your fan base!

 

[Wheeler711]

No no and no! I have to disagree I prefer the 1 time payment. Vicky is not world of warcraft. Paying a subscription is just ridiculous!!!

 

[Olaus Petrus]

This got to be most ridiculous idea I have heard in ages. Paradox patching policy has been incredibly good, so I have no complains that they abandon their games.

Also personally I would stop buying Paradox games if they would try to rip off my money with monthly fees. I have principle that I pay once and then I don't want to pay for playing the game which I have already bought, which is the reason why I never bought World of Warcraft, despite the fact that I liked Warcraft I-III and that I enjoy playing computer RPGs.

But I'm favourable towards expansions (as long as there's enough substance) and I have bought every expansion so far to my favourite Paradox titles. Now I'm planning to pre-order latest EUIII expansion. That business model works fine, so why fix something which isn't broken?

 

[ashandresash]

(...) That business model works fine, so why fix something which isn't broken?

+1

I understand we all would like to see our favourite games getting better and better asap, but Paradox is doing fine with patches, expansions... and enhancing community. The decision adopted by PI, making moddability easier and bigger is a step in the good direction.