[To Dev/Marketing Team] Suggestions for current EU4 marketing strategy and potential

[Mystery_Meme]

@BjornB @DDRJake @Trin Tragula @candyalien
Hi, just reposting this from Development Diary 26th September 2017. The message below is entirely my opinion, and I respectfully ask that readers consider its content carefully before dismissing it as just another whinge - I am only trying to help by advancing EU4 sales and thereby the size of its community and growth. Feel free to comment and such, but please do not try to start any arguments as I post this with good intentions. Take or leave my advice as you wish, though remain faithful to your decision.
----
Devs, your content and updates look great (despite some of the issues mentioned in various posts, which I'm confident you're reading). However, I urge you to be mindful of the amount of DLC you are releasing - every time you add yet another expansion or another content pack, you are blocking more and more people from entering the EU4 community due to the sheer amount of purchases they see on the store page. Many of us as experienced players already have much of the DLC, but how do you expect someone who has never played EU4 in the past to view the game page and be motivated to purchase when faced with so much confusing information around what each DLC contains, what they add to the game, which ones are worth it etc.

^ Scary! Confusing! Unorganised!

Marketing tip: make it easier and more streamlined for an outsider to enter the EU4 community feeling confident that they are receiving value for their money and are being delivered a complete Europa Universalis IV experience package (e.g. utilise bundling or new player discount). The sight of such a long list is scaring off potential buyers, I promise you, which is hurting sales and in turn means you drive up DLC prices/frequency to accommodate, furthering the problem. Do not be afraid to take a risk, because everyone knows you have to spend money to make money, and this will lead to further growth and prosperity for this project into the future.

Feel free to take or leave my advice, but I stand confidently by it and hope it aids you in some way.

Respectfully,
MM
----
Thank you for reading.

 

[3ishop]

They are making the DLC as long as it is selling. It's making them a profit they are happy with, so they will continue down the path as long as it continues to work for them.

 

[Mystery_Meme]

They are making the DLC as long as it is selling. It's making them a profit they are happy with, so they will continue down the path as long as it continues to work for them.

Except I'm confident they would make so much more by using better thought-out marketing tactics, in addition to expanding the player-base and thereby the amount of loyal consumers. A risk is required for reward, and I stand by the motion that this would be of benefit to EU4 and its potential as a product.

 

[Ironside121]

All they need to do to tidy up the mess is put things into bundles. 2-3 DLC's per bundle+ the little cosmetic DLC's released in that time period.

Everyone will tell the new players to get the DLC's on special when they're cheap as chips, this is what the bundles would achieve but they wouldn't have to wait for them to come on special- and it would really get rid of the clutter in the store.

Honestly at least it's not as bad as Train Simulator- there's about $5000NZD worth of DLC for that game and most of them were 50% off

 

[Mystery_Meme]

Additionally, have you not checked the reviews on the immersion pack Third Rome? What about the plummet of ratings post-release of this DLC? Let us not forget that the community makes the game, and ignorance will only lead to eventual failure. Trust me, you want your consumer to feel valued.

 

[Mystery_Meme]

All they need to do to tidy up the mess is put things into bundles. 2-3 DLC's per bundle+ the little cosmetic DLC's released in that time period.

Everyone will tell the new players to get the DLC's on special when they're cheap as chips, this is what the bundles would achieve but they wouldn't have to wait for them to come on special- and it would really get rid of the clutter in the store.

Honestly at least it's not as bad as Train Simulator- there's about $5000NZD worth of DLC for that game and most of them were 50% off

This is exactly what I'm pushing for, or something like it at least.

 

[Had a dad]

Honestly at least it's not as bad as Train Simulator- there's about $5000NZD worth of DLC for that game and most of them were 50% off

I think when not on sale it's a tad over $10,000.00 US

 

[3ishop]

Except I'm confident they would make so much more by using better thought-out marketing tactics, in addition to expanding the player-base and thereby the amount of loyal consumers. A risk is required for reward, and I stand by the motion that this would be of benefit to EU4 and its potential as a product.

EU4 on Steam is the 33rd most played game atm. So clearly the market method isn't working badly for them. They are still making enough profit to continue making DLC at a profit so it's not going badly for them. With the sales you can get the game and DLC cheaply any way. If people are really put off by the amount of DLC they aren't likely to be the ones who'd invest in it any way. Bundles will just make it look more expensive as they'll still need to sell the individual packs as some people will have bought part but not others.

I think when not on sale it's a tad over $10,000.00 US

Yeah think a few game review sites bring up the new costs each year.

 

[Metz]

They should clump up the DLCs in "generation packs". So people feel they are getting more for the money they are paying. It would also help sell some of the DLCs that are less popular.

 

[creativitypersonified]

Some methong they could try is to categorize it so that the list is not long. Aesthetics can still make a great difference. And possible something to stretch out the content. The reviews on steam are a terrible indicator. If somebody doesn't do independent research he may not understand the content each dlc provides. A more detailed guide through them would be helpful.

I don't think straight up gluing them together would work. I think people are gonna be put off by having to buy a lot of useless to them content to get what they want and thus skip the dlc.

 

[Dominion]

I think when not on sale it's a tad over $10,000.00 US

~5800 € on Steam if everything is on full price. At least for me.

Quite the fun fact to know. Never heard about the game before

 

[inreadible]

I own everything except a couple content packs and a music pack so I can guarantee I'm not saying this to help my own wallet:
For the love of god, include some of the oldest expansions in the base game.
Let's see, the wiki lists 11 expansions. How about including the five oldest in the base game.

I'm a sucker and I buy the expansions as they come but I'd also like to see new people get in to the game so you'll get more customers and money to develop the game even more. I honestly believe that the price tag is stopping a lot of people from even starting the game. Sure, there's always the argument "they can try the base game first etc etc". Maybe they could, maybe they don't want to play a watered down version of the game. I can't speak for others but I can tell you I am like that. I sometimes refrain from buying a game because of a high price tag with the DLCs included. It's because if I start to learn a new game, I want to have the full experience right from the start and not add DLCs later that change/complicate things again.

Also, maybe merge some of the older content packs together to clean up the Steam store page.

 

[Mystery_Meme]

EU4 on Steam is the 33rd most played game atm. So clearly the market method isn't working badly for them. They are still making enough profit to continue making DLC at a profit so it's not going badly for them. With the sales you can get the game and DLC cheaply any way. If people are really put off by the amount of DLC they aren't likely to be the ones who'd invest in it any way. Bundles will just make it look more expensive as they'll still need to sell the individual packs as some people will have bought part but not others.


Yeah think a few game review sites bring up the new costs each year.

This isn't about profit. This is about growth. It's about not driving away players by greeting them with a daunting view of 50 million DLC on the front page. It's about showcasing Paradox as a business which works for the player, rather than one that simply seeks to bleed them dry. Why would someone want to sign themselves up to such an endless tree of expense and can't-haves when they could simply purchase something else that's delivered as one complete packaged experience? Think about ethical business too rather than purely money-driven, because they go hand-in-hand.

 

[Mortheim]

Well, most of the ideas in this thread are too obvious. So, if they weren't implemented already, it shows us that Paradox is pretty happy with current state of affairs. Ofc some steps towards new players would bring more fresh blood and help develop game more, but it is risk-reward situation and, often, good decisions are overlooked because of it. Tbh, i know at least 5 people to whom i suggested EU4 and who said to me "Tf is with this dlcs and how much more will their be?" And they won't go for it because:
1) you can't try it without buying it;
2) number of DLCs grow, so won't game be shallow without them;
3) buying old DLCs for same price as new seems a little bit costly;

 

[SolSys]

1) you can't try it without buying it;
2) number of DLCs grow, so won't game be shallow without them;
3) buying old DLCs for same price as new seems a little bit costly;

1. There is a demo [though I don't think it is an updated version].
3. Buy on a sale?

As someone who can't afford to play games due to time constraints I make sure to research into games I want to buy [LP's, reviews, etc.]. There are enough times when a long DLC list turns out to be simply costumes.

My point is if a potential player isn't willing to invest research time then the chances of them sticking to game such as EU4 are rather slim.

 

[SolSys]

...

That's a long and winded post saying the DLC list is long and winded.
What's more, the core complaint does not warrant that intro.

Disagreed purely for poor presentation.

Edit: BTW, none of the pinged devs deal with the raised subject. You could reach the marketing by posting in the AMA thread on the main PDX forum.

 

[Mortheim]

1. There is a demo [though I don't think it is an updated version].

Yeah, that demo...What version it is? It doesn't give feeling of game at all.

3. Buy on a sale?

YAY! The most reliable way to convince someone that game cost is fair - recommend them to buy it during sale. It already suggests that cost is too high and there is no reason not to wait till first sale.

 

[3ishop]

This isn't about profit. This is about growth. It's about not driving away players by greeting them with a daunting view of 50 million DLC on the front page. It's about showcasing Paradox as a business which works for the player, rather than one that simply seeks to bleed them dry. Why would someone want to sign themselves up to such an endless tree of expense and can't-haves when they could simply purchase something else that's delivered as one complete packaged experience? Think about ethical business too rather than purely money-driven, because they go hand-in-hand.

4 years since the game was released, being that high on the player list seems to show it has had a good growth with this system and that in is retaining players really well. The bigger issue would be the base cost, the game at release was priced at £39.99, it's currently £34.99. Dropping the base games cost would seem a much better way to draw in new players than changing the base DLC cost.

I'd link the lower price with this:

For the love of god, include some of the oldest expansions in the base game.

Rolling the older packs in the base game, increasing the price of the base game to compensate. This lowers the DLC that you think puts players off, means long term players might be drawn back to play if they didn't buy the content and means that the mechanics from these older packs are now a basic feature so they can be tweaked and linked with other game mechanics.

I'd also think that Steam needs to split up DLC packs, so there's "content", "skins" and "audio" subsections. This to me is the worst part of the DLC set up for Pdox games.