DLC

[LoGaL]

I hope not to start a flame thread,was just wondering, how you guys feel about this? 2 months from release and we have alrdy DLC's with a total cost which is roughly 60-70% the cost of the game itself
I haven't bought the game yet, but this speed in releasing DLC is a little bit too much, is it stuff that they already prepared before releasing the game?Is it low quality? Should i wait the 75% sales and buy the whole game or it is not even worth the cost?

[Darios]

I honestly really like it. For Rome 2 I had to wait over six months before I could play as the Getae and approximately a year and a half before I could play as Cimmeria (note to mod people: I don't play mods) so it did grow a bit frustrating waiting and hoping that my favorite factions would one day be released. Western Europe at the release of Attila had some huge holes in it (too many generic Germanic factions, Nordic Celts, etc) so I am glad that the DLC came out and filled in these areas of the map. When the Celtic DLC came out I started a Saxon campaign and had some crazy good fun fighting the Celts and Romans over Britannia. I'm eagerly waiting for CA to come out with Sarmatian (including fixes to the Alans) and Slavic DLCs in order to fill out Eastern Europe in the Grand Campaign.

Of course, I understand that everyone has a unique opinion concerning this. I have no real philosophical issue concerning DLC because while it is a crude form of nickel and diming, it does ensure that games continue to get patching/updates/new content for months after release. I know that it gives developers the opportunity to often cut corners and release an unfinished product (i.e. lack of Celts at release) but the benefits outweigh the negatives. Rome 2 is currently a very good game and has tons of unique and interesting factions that really offer some varied game play experiences. You cannot say that for Attila at the moment hence...bring on the DLC.

I guess people also have unique perspectives concerning the price as I imagine that spending $8 is a bigger deal for some people than it is for others. CA games are more or less marketed towards the Anglo-American audience and as an American myself, spending $8 for something that I know that I am going to enjoy isn't a big deal at all. That's the same amount of money I might spend on lunch tomorrow. At the same time, I sorta have a unique perspective on the situation because I am married to a Romanian girl and I do not know a lot of people in Romania who would feel very comfortable spending 8 euro on what they might consider to be questionable "content." When it is more difficult to put the money together then yeah, I can see how people might see CA's DLC as a nasty scam.

[PointOfViewGun]

What determines the right pace of delivering DLCs?

[xjlxking]

I dislike it. The objective of a company is not consumer satisfaction. You have a d1** up your alley if you believe that. A company's first priority is to increase EPS of its stockholders. This is finance and accounting 101. DLC is very popular right now because the market is saturated with similar games so DLC creates the illusion that players want. You get a new shiny weapon for only $5. The game industry and the market itself is also highly highly unregulated hence why it has been exploding and most companies post record gains.

With that said, you would be a fool to say that the company is doing you a favor with DLC. You can't trust a company. You don't know what stuff the took out that should have been in the game and sold as DLC. We have seen companies do this like I game ME3. Obviously companies are learning to not get caught

[Imperator Artorius]

I would be more inclined to buy DLC if it wasn't so soon after release before issues I have with the game have either been officially patched or fixed with mods and in regards to culture packs, mods existed that completely fleshed out these "new" factions. And even then only on sale at maybe 25% price in regards to culture packs. Mini-campaign expansions I'm actually looking forward to. Despite my apparent idealism displayed in other threads, Im aware that DLC is a reality of the current market and I'm not opposed to the idea of DLC, just what I perceive as bad DLC.

[Theramines]

If you have the money and the inclination, just buy the base game now and enjoy it for what it is. I recommend it because it is relatively cheap and just plain fun.

For the DLC:

Do you need them now to enjoy the game? No. The base game (plus mods along the way) should keep you entertained enough until DLC is cheaper in the future. As of now, the culture packs look like bad value for money. You'll probably want to get the Blood and Gore DLC immediately, though.

[veverčák]

Well Attila is good game and if you want buy it you would probably not be disappointment IMHO (but rather go one more time trough Lets plays and reviews). The basic game already contains everything you should need for 40+ hours of game play. 10 factions: Both Roman Empires, Sassanid Empire, one Germanic kingdom (Franks), one "Viking" faction (Saxons), 4 Migrating factions (Vandals, Alans, Ostrogoth and Visigoth) and Huns which are unique due to they inability to settle. So basics are cover already.

Viking and Longbeards are adding 3 faction to Viking and Germanic kingdoms list. Viking dlc is probably the weakest of them and is offering new culture trait "Viking Raiders" (Saxons share their culture trait with other Germanic kingdom but roster is Nordic), some special units for each of three factions and that is. Perhaps interesting are Danes with imunity to seasicknes (no penalty for your land unit on sea) and Geats getting imunity to snow attrition.

Longbeards are little bit more special as most factions gets some special unit, special look for the leader, special buildings, two new accessories and advisor and "Quest Line" to obtain ubergeneral based upon mythological journey of said general. The same goes for Celts but here you get access to only factions with Celtic roster and starting with Celtic Paganism.

Blood and Burn or whatever it is called adds only visual spectacle and some more bloody images which I would say you can pass without any problem as with most cosmetic dlc.

About the pacing: I would say it is rather better then they are pumping dlc with such speed as we know they planed 7 dlc (7 code names for dlc were founded by moders) and at least moders could work on their work without need to updating their work every month or so. Not to mention dlc pacing is rather about PR of said company in question. Europa Universalis IV come out in 3 different editions each offering roughly 3 dlc (mostly cosmetic, so 12 or so day one dlc) yet it was praise as good thing as Paradox (makers of EU IV.) have great plans for further expansions and that they are now playing on same field as those ugly motheers from Ubisoft and Sega.

Anyway, this guy covered faction dlc so you can try to watch him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqtWyzAS8rk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfVg...daKPIRqMCyMTXJ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iy0a...CyMTXJ&index=1

[Lionheart11]

This part of why im disgusted about DLC, im not paying $200aud for a ing game CA.

[Garensterz]

I like DLC's, I wouldn't mind if they release it when or what. I just hate the practice of cutting out factions and sell them as a separate content.

[Darios]

I just hate the practice of cutting out factions and sell them as a separate content.

The only factions that were cut are the Celts. CA was caught with their pants down and they probably realized that they had to release the Celtic DLC immediately. It was a great PR move because who has really complained about the Celts since then?

At the same time, who would have ever complained if CA hadn't fashioned the Jutes, Danes, and Geats as "Vikings", left them as copy/paste Germanic tribes, and never sold them as DLC? They had very little to do with the Fall of Rome and represented more a pop culture/fringe interest among fans. The same goes with the Longbeards - I like that CA created a DLC that filled in Germania but my game experience wouldn't have been better or worse if I could not play as the Burgundians. Hence, I don't mind either being DLC. The same will eventually come true for the Sarmatians and Slavs I hope - factions with a fringe interest that nicely fill in certain parts of the campaign map.

For those complaining about the price of these culture packs - remember that CA is a British company based outside of London. It's very expensive to make a living there and good programmers don't come cheap. If people want to see their games patched/fixed/updated then it's going to have to be profitable one way or another for CA. I imagine that with the relatively small price of Attila (40 euro), SEGA getting their cut, and crazy British taxes, that paid DLC is needed for CA to pad their profit margins in order to make continued patching worthwhile.

[Ataegina]

DLC is a good thing IF it is reasonably priced and IF adds something new to make the core game more richer. Being devil's advocate, i can understand why dlc is so important, if not for this revenue-stream, many developers would likely be in big trouble since its a super competitive market and games lost value within couple weeks. BUT we can't forget that every good thing can be twisted into a bad thing....... Instead of selling factions already ingame and "new units" that are simply already existing units but with different colour and renamed, they should look at their dlc model from ETW up to Shogun 2, make NEW UNIT PACKS, or Addon featuring new mechanics/graphics/misc gameplay.....

However, nobody is forced to spend $100, $200 ....... this game is fun no matter how many dlc's they will release, but let's be clear the game isn't $100 or $200..... the game is $40 only......

[Imperator Artorius]

DLC is a good thing IF it is reasonably priced and IF adds something new to make the core game more richer. Being devil's advocate, i can understand why dlc is so important, if not for this revenue-stream, many developers would likely be in big trouble since its a super competitive market and games lost value within couple weeks. BUT we can't forget that every good thing can be twisted into a bad thing....... Instead of selling factions already ingame and "new units" that are simply already existing units but with different colour and renamed, they should look at their dlc model from ETW up to Shogun 2, make NEW UNIT PACKS, or Addon featuring new mechanics/graphics/misc gameplay.....

However, nobody is forced to spend $100, $200 ....... this game is fun no matter how many dlc's they will release, but let's be clear the game isn't $100 or $200..... the game is $40 only......

With respect, I heavily disagree about CA using their dlc model of ETW-Shogun 2 in terms of unit packs. I'm really not a fan of paid unit pack DLCs for strategy games as more often than not, it heavily imbalances the multiplayer and puts people that don't want to fork out at a disadvantage, as well as the fact that modders can make unit packs for free so really there isn't much incentive to buy them. However I'm all for content that adds new mechanics and ways to play the game. Rise of the Samurai, to me is an example of TW DLC done right, although it too added units for use in multiplayer.

[Påsan]

With respect, I heavily disagree about CA using their dlc model of ETW-Shogun 2 in terms of unit packs. I'm really not a fan of paid unit pack DLCs for strategy games as more often than not, it heavily imbalances the multiplayer and puts people that don't want to fork out at a disadvantage, as well as the fact that modders can make unit packs for free so really there isn't much incentive to buy them. However I'm all for content that adds new mechanics and ways to play the game. Rise of the Samurai, to me is an example of TW DLC done right, although it too added units for use in multiplayer.

Only the longbeards are top tier when it comes to multi (and some vanilla factions are just as good if not better). The Vikings and the Celts lack the cavalry to compete. Besides Multi in Atilla is boring and formulatic.

[LoGaL]

ok i got the point xD , i'll what the 75% discount next december )

[Darios]

However I'm all for content that adds new mechanics and ways to play the game. Rise of the Samurai, to me is an example of TW DLC done right, although it too added units for use in multiplayer.

How could CA justify selling particular mechanics as DLC but not giving them to everyone? It simply cannot work like that because there would end up being dozens of different "official" versions of the game. How would multiplayer compatibility work? Let's say they came up with a "diplomatic options" DLC that allowed me to give/demand regions. What would happen if I played a MP campaign with a friend who doesn't have the DLC and tried to give him a region?

ok i got the point xD , i'll what the 75% discount next december )

That is the unspoken main criticism of DLC = economic reasons. When no one wants to say that 8 euro is too much for them they instead complain about the content itself yet pounce upon it once a 75% discount sale occurs the following summer.

[veverčák]

Well, more power to you LoGal. I definitely could agree that getting dlc for 75% discount is better, but the game in its basic form is worth 40 Euro/X amount of your currency IMHO.

[LestaT]

I hope not to start a flame thread,was just wondering, how you guys feel about this? 2 months from release and we have alrdy DLC's with a total cost which is roughly 60-70% the cost of the game itself
I haven't bought the game yet, but this speed in releasing DLC is a little bit too much, is it stuff that they already prepared before releasing the game?Is it low quality? Should i wait the 75% sales and buy the whole game or it is not even worth the cost?

We're going to have a minimum of 3 more DLC before the year is out.

[Vaxx]

I like the DLC for TW games in general for a few reasons. Of course my like for them is relative to how I play/buy the game.

First, I usually only play one faction per game that I like. This makes it pretty simple. With Attila I was planning on only playing the Saxons, but the pre order DLC and the chance to play as Jutes made me more inclined to buy early. I hardly ever pre order but this time I did.

Second, since I only play one faction I couldn't care less what faction pack came out if it was not the one I wanted to play. If, say I wanted to play as the Picts, dropping $8 on it on top of a $40 game seems just fine for a new game title price. No issue here. And even though I have not purchased ANY dlc for Attila aside from Blood and Burning I am glad it is there to enhance my AI roster and let people who are interested in playing that faction buy and play.

And finally, eventually much DLC with be on sale or part of a sale "pack". Last weekend I picked up Shogun2 plus all DLC sans blood, for $12. I most likely will not be playing more than one faction nor playing the added campaigns but its there if I wanted to.

Again this is how I look at it. Some people seem to have the Pokémon syndrome when it comes to DLC even if it is highly unlikely they will play every faction in the game to completion, but they "gotta have em all".

Look at it like a buffet. Pick what you want, leave what you don't. Makes it much easier to understand and when you realize you are not forced to buy every single pack it makes rolling your eyes at people who cry/complain non stop easier to do.

[Imperator Artorius]

The difficulties with integrating new mechanics onto the grand campaign map, especially in regards to multiplayer compatibility is where mini campaigns like we had for Rome II, RotS for SHogun 2 and the Kingdoms campaigns come in. These allow for new, perhaps more indepth mechanics depending on the campaign's scope that would be too difficult to implement for the already existing grand campaign. Whether or not this actually happens is up in the air but still, it is a possibility.

[MrHoon]

I think my biggest complaints about Attila DLC stems mainly from the Viking Celts pack. The Vikings really is just nordic faction with 2-3 units for each faction, while celts pack felt like "Oh we ran out of time for release lets finish this later and release it as a DLC"

The germanic factions DLC on the otherhand were fine for me. The new buildings, really visually different germans were a huge bonus for me.

Really in a perfect world, Vikings/Celtic DLC wouldnt exist and be in the game from the start for free and we would have a better Sarmatian/Slavic/Armenian/Emergent Roman factions as DLC