DLC General Discussion

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

In M2TW, we were able to play as every faction besides the mongols and Timiruds (you can unlock the Papal States through file editing). What's wrong with expecting the entire core game not to be an "unlock to get more fun things!" type of game?

Well, you did get less playable factions in Shogun 2 and Rome Total War. Is that enough to justify a lower expectation? Moreover, CA is now telling us that they are only selling the game with 8 playable factions & +1 Pontus, not every possible faction.

If you want more fun things, pay for it. Is that reasonable ?

 

[Mirglip]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

These fun things are already there on the map. In Rome, at least we were able to unlock them on our own by editing the files. This time CA will probably make it so that it's impossible and they can get for money for locking out core-game things.

Remember, the Greek states aren't some far-flung backwater tribe in the middle of nowhere. They're GREECE. History owes a lot to them, and the Roman culture has a huge amount of Greek influence.

 

[AngryTitusPullo]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

In M2TW, we were able to play as every faction besides the mongols and Timiruds (you can unlock the Papal States through file editing). What's wrong with expecting the entire core game not to be an "unlock to get more fun things!" type of game?

Yes but in M2TW there are only 31 factions including rebels, playable or not. Even then the vanilla game only gives 5 fully developed factions while the rest can be unlock only after completing campaign.

In Rome II base on reports there are already 117 factions. 8 playable factions are developed for the main game while 1 given for free post core game development. Making more factions playable isn't simply involved changing No or Minor to Yes or Major in the startpos. They need to be unique and played differently than each other (as CA claimed the playable factions will be) with testers assigned to each playable faction to see how the factions plays and the AI reacts in detail.

Having all 117 icons to choose from the campaign selection map may seems fun but do you really playing each of them just for the sake of playing will be fun ?

Even with 20 playable factions given. Do you think you are going to play all 20 factions for thousands of turns ? Or just play them for few turns then quitting and change to other factions until you find the one you like.

 

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

These fun things are already there on the map. In Rome, at least we were able to unlock them on our own by editing the files. This time CA will probably make it so that it's impossible and they can get for money for locking out core-game things.

Remember, the Greek states aren't some far-flung backwater tribe in the middle of nowhere. They're GREECE. History owes a lot to them, and the Roman culture has a huge amount of Greek influence.

Companies / people are not required to offer services / products at cost. Just because they do not need additional cost, does not mean those products SHOULD be sold at $0, right? They have to make a profit, right?

The train is still going to depart the station no matter if they are full or not. Just because taking up 1 more passenger does not cost the train company much does not mean the passenger should take the train free of charge (or at a lower price). It is up to the company to decide how much they charge for their products, services. They are not bound to provide them at cost.

 

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Yes but in M2TW there are only 31 factions including rebels, playable or not. Even then the vanilla game only gives 5 fully developed factions while the rest can be unlock only after completing campaign.

In Rome II base on reports there are already 117 factions. 8 playable factions are developed for the main game while 1 given for free post core game development. Making more factions playable isn't simply involved changing No or Minor to Yes or Major in the startpos. They need to be unique and played differently than each other (as CA claimed the playable factions will be) with testers assigned to each playable faction to see how the factions plays and the AI reacts in detail.

Having all 117 icons to choose from the campaign selection map may seems fun but do you really playing each of them just for the sake of playing will be fun ?

Even with 20 playable factions given. Do you think you are going to play all 20 factions for thousands of turns ? Or just play them for few turns then quitting and change to other factions until you find the one you like.

Your argument says CA additional cost for developing the game justify the additional price. Mine points out that... price does not necessary equal / be proportional to the cost. Especially when the customers have no way to produce that product themselves. That is how capitalism works. If you find a cheaper way to produce a product, you are rewarded by earning more profit ( if you quote the same selling price).

If you are a wizard who can create food without using any raw material, you are still entitled to sell them at a price over $0.

 

[AngryTitusPullo]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Your argument says CA additional cost for developing the game justify the additional price. Mine points out that... price does not necessary equal / be proportion to the cost. Especially when the customers have no way to produce that product themselves. That is how capitalism works. If you find a cheaper way to produce a product, you are rewarded by earning more profit ( if you quote the same selling price).

I didn't say anything about cost. I'm just saying the difference between M2TW and Rome II. I'm talking that the 8 playable factions (not including DLC) for Rome II (base on advertised informations) should have more replaylability and unique value comparing with 31 factions in M2TW which are pretty generic comparing with each other.

 

[black-dragon]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Best thing to do is wait until the game is on sale for $5-10. If you can't do that, then you have no right to complain.

 

[HappyGoodVibes]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

This is what will cause CA, SEGA, and whatever other major game developers to eventually fail. They stop caring about the game, start caring more about the profit (businesses) and stop taking risks. Indie games are exploding in popularity today simple because they are based on a business model that is not centered on trying to screw the customer out of all their money. Indie games also take more thought to develop and sell since a AAA studio can develop the same game they made 10 years ago and still use marketing techniques to sell that same game.

By the time SEGA realizes that their business practices are bad, the market will already be full of other game studios that are really answering the customer's demands.

 

[GrudgeNL]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Best thing to do is wait until the game is on sale for $5-10. -snip-

You do realize if everyone would be doing that, there wouldnt be videogames these days to begin with? That's bad advice.

If you feel games are not worth more than 10 dollars, than why do you even bother playing games at all?


--

It's laughable actually. People get higher expectations. Developers ask publishers for more money to reach those expectations. The game's price increases by 5-10 dollars in order to pay back the money to the publisher and having a nice profit for a future game. And yet people complain about the price.

This is what will cause CA, SEGA, and whatever other major game developers to eventually fail. They stop caring about the game, start caring more about the profit (businesses) and stop taking risks. Indie games are exploding in popularity today simple because they are based on a business model that is not centered on trying to screw the customer out of all their money. Indie games also take more thought to develop and sell since a AAA studio can develop the same game they made 10 years ago and still use marketing techniques to sell that same game.

By the time SEGA realizes that their business practices are bad, the market will already be full of other game studios that are really answering the customer's demands.

I respectfully disagree. The only reason why Indie games are exploding in popularity, is because they do not develop by demand, but by sole company driven creativity. Indie developers create their own thing and continue to do so. When they create sequels, they're no longer an Indie company because they usually found a publisher and because they're working on gamer demand "We want a sequel!".

And it's the gamer who 'created' the publisher by constantly raising expectations, forcing developers to search their money elsewhere in order to reach those expectations. Ofcourse it's doomed to fail. Companies who create the same thing over and over again do need to put their innovative stuff somewhere else. Gameplay is usually not an option. So be it graphics, marketing, diversity, better animations. That's going to cost a lot of money.

These game devs and publishers do not try to screw over their customer. They try to earn back their money, along with a profit to feed their family and work on new games. If you're suggesting game companies are evil, you're basically insulting every profit driven business on the entire planet. Life isn't free unfortunately, neither are game series whom evolve over time because of gamer demand.

I hear no one complaining about car companies, clothing companies, electronic companies who basically do exactly the same. Investment > Build/Create > Sell (Earn back investment) > feedback > Investment.

 

[black-dragon]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

You do realize if everyone would be doing that, there wouldnt be videogames these days to begin with? That's bad advice.

If you feel games are not worth more than 10 dollars, than why do you even bother playing games at all?

Lets assume that you actually meant that I think that *this* game is worth $10, otherwise your argument is just a silly strawman. And we wouldn't want that, would we? So anyway. If they want my money, then they need to make a moddable game. I made the mistake of pre-ordering Empire, and I'm not gunna do that again. I got no more than about 10 average hours out of Shogun 2 - so my expectations aren't great. The only reason I'm buying it at all is because of the faint hope that they'll do something I eventually like. It's really not my problem whether or not CA make money from me. Just like it's not their problem whether I like their game or not after I purchase it. And no, I don't realize that people paying what they think a game is worth will destroy the gaming industry. This is actually the basis of it and the reason why CA have been successful.

Capitalism 101: I'm not obligated to buy your product. It's your own fault if you sell it cheaper at a later point and then fail to make money because of it.

Oh, yeah. I'm not the one complaining. You are. I just offered up a piece of advice for people who don't like the price. Don't like it? Move somewhere with an economic system that sits in line with your views.

PS: if it upsets you that much, I'm willing to allow you to purchase the game for me at RRP. That should solve both of our problems.

 

[Mirglip]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Yes but in M2TW there are only 31 factions including rebels, playable or not. Even then the vanilla game only gives 5 fully developed factions while the rest can be unlock only after completing campaign.

In Rome II base on reports there are already 117 factions. 8 playable factions are developed for the main game while 1 given for free post core game development. Making more factions playable isn't simply involved changing No or Minor to Yes or Major in the startpos. They need to be unique and played differently than each other (as CA claimed the playable factions will be) with testers assigned to each playable faction to see how the factions plays and the AI reacts in detail.

Having all 117 icons to choose from the campaign selection map may seems fun but do you really playing each of them just for the sake of playing will be fun ?

Even with 20 playable factions given. Do you think you are going to play all 20 factions for thousands of turns ? Or just play them for few turns then quitting and change to other factions until you find the one you like.

I played almost every faction in M2TW, do you have any dedication at all? What do you mean, only a few of them are fleshed out? Besides religious similarities, each faction has unique buildings and troops. There were 31 factions, you say? 28 out of 31 were comparable, as compared to the 9 out of 117? News flash - starting bonuses like "increased technology rate" hardly make a faction unique.

Companies / people are not required to offer services / products at cost. Just because they do not need additional cost, does not mean those products SHOULD be sold at $0, right? They have to make a profit, right?

The train is still going to depart the station no matter if they are full or not. Just because taking up 1 more passenger does not cost the train company much does not mean the passenger should take the train free of charge (or at a lower price). It is up to the company to decide how much they charge for their products, services. They are not bound to provide them at cost.

Great, this argument again. Of course they're not required to. But then are they required to make a good product at all? They can make Rome the only playable faction in the game (which you buy for 40 dollars) and each faction costs 2 dollars to unlock, but that's okay because if you purchase the custom battles addon you can play all these other factions for the meager sum of 5 dollars. If you can't see how you're being ripped off, you're just refusing to look at it from another point of view. It's clear that CA gets tons of money already. CA didn't go bankrupt from releasing expansion packs that actually added new content, like Kingdoms for M2TW, did they? They didn't barely make a profit when they didn't lock you out of factions already in the game and charge you 4 dollars to unlock them.

Of course they are not bound to provide a good game. But that's what you should EXPECT.




I don't expect this is the choice of CA, it's probably because of the market analysts over at SEGA. Just because I call out milking until the last drop, it does not mean I'm lashing out at CA.

 

[HappyGoodVibes]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Spoiler

You do realize if everyone would be doing that, there wouldnt be videogames these days to begin with? That's bad advice.

If you feel games are not worth more than 10 dollars, than why do you even bother playing games at all?


--

It's laughable actually. People get higher expectations. Developers ask publishers for more money to reach those expectations. The game's price increases by 5-10 dollars in order to pay back the money to the publisher and having a nice profit for a future game. And yet people complain about the price.



I respectfully disagree. The only reason why Indie games are exploding in popularity, is because they do not develop by demand, but by sole company driven creativity. Indie developers create their own thing and continue to do so. When they create sequels, they're no longer an Indie company because they usually found a publisher and because they're working on gamer demand "We want a sequel!".

And it's the gamer who 'created' the publisher by constantly raising expectations, forcing developers to search their money elsewhere in order to reach those expectations. Ofcourse it's doomed to fail. Companies who create the same thing over and over again do need to put their innovative stuff somewhere else. Gameplay is usually not an option. So be it graphics, marketing, diversity, better animations. That's going to cost a lot of money.

These game devs and publishers do not try to screw over their customer. They try to earn back their money, along with a profit to feed their family and work on new games. If you're suggesting game companies are evil, you're basically insulting every profit driven business on the entire planet. Life isn't free unfortunately, neither are game series whom evolve over time because of gamer demand.

I hear no one complaining about car companies, clothing companies, electronic companies who basically do exactly the same. Investment > Build/Create > Sell (Earn back investment) > feedback > Investment.

Larger developers can't meet everyone's needs, but Indie devs can. Big developers are stuck trying to please a million different people at once while indie devs focus on a target group and get that group. This eventually pulls people away from the larger devs because their needs are being met somewhere else. Big game devlopers do a lot more than earn money to feed their families, they make a killing (not necessarily the developers themselves, but someone at the company makes a lot). Large companies are bad in general, and yes plent of people hate car companies, clothing companies, etc... Large companies are anti-competition, anti-progress, hate to take risks, hate to really innovate unless someone is pulling them along, and this has been proven in history.

 

[GrudgeNL]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Larger developers can't meet everyone's needs, but Indie devs can. Big developers are stuck trying to please a million different people at once while indie devs focus on a target group and get that group. This eventually pulls people away from the larger devs because their needs are being met somewhere else. Big game devlopers do a lot more than earn money to feed their families, they make a killing (not necessarily the developers themselves, but someone at the company makes a lot). Large companies are bad in general, and yes plent of people hate car companies, clothing companies, etc... Large companies are anti-competition, anti-progress, hate to take risks, hate to really innovate unless someone is pulling them along, and this has been proven in history.

I really cannot agree to that. Indie developers cannot meet everyone's need and expectations just like big companies. Why? Because there's subjectivity, opinions. Not to mention the fact that there are thousands of Indie games being created each year by students and freelancers alike. And yet, we only know a few. And even less are actually good ( in my opinion). New ideas don't always attract the majority. New ideas may innovate, but severely limit the product.

It doesn't matter if they're Big companies or small companies. There's always half the fanbase that either doesn't like the product or wants major changes. Taking a risk is playing with one's future in most cases. And to be honest, there's nothing wrong with big anti competition companies. It's called balance. Neither side is bad, as they equalize each other. If it wasn't for the existence of both, the world we live in would've been a very different place.

 

[AngryTitusPullo]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I played almost every faction in M2TW, do you have any dedication at all? What do you mean, only a few of them are fleshed out? Besides religious similarities, each faction has unique buildings and troops. There were 31 factions, you say? 28 out of 31 were comparable, as compared to the 9 out of 117? News flash - starting bonuses like "increased technology rate" hardly make a faction unique.

Nope. I only played England, Turks and Egypt. The only game that I have played and completed all available factions is surprisingly Shogun 2 but that's maybe because I like the time period.

The other games I just maybe played 3 or 4 factions in total. When I say plaed I mean fully completed the campaign requirement and not just play the factions for few turns.

I don't know about Rome II but from whatever early information we have at this time each factions will play differently and not just the different starting positions as in previous Total War games. Even if the differences is like playing Otomo comparing with Tokugawa that it certainly enough to meet my expectation. After all Total War has always been about painting the map your factions color.

Now if CA wants they can make 100 factions playable easily. But we might not get unique internal political system within a faction, traits for armies/legions which stays on even if the army is disbanded/destroyed/rebuilt and so on. CA can make 117 factions playable, but it wil be just generic build building, raise army and conquer the map.

That is not what I want.

 

[Evariste]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I don't know how "we" as a collective should feel, but one thing's for certain.

CA should feel bad.

I think you're misplacing the blame. I'm sure Creative Assembly would like nothing more than to develop games with the Blizzard/Valve/Willy Wonka model, but that's just not realistic for most of the industry. CA's corporate overlord Sega is "to blame" in that they're the ones paying the bills and they have to turn a profit.

If the development process of Rome 2 is roughly similar to that of other similarly budgeted titles, then one of two things probably happened.

Either Sega told CA that their game needs to make a certain amount of money and the leadership at CA is doing what they can to make sure they meet that mandate, or Sega is micromanaging and specifically requiring Day One DLC, pre-order exclusives/bonuses, etc.

I hate knowing that I'm missing out on chunks of content that used to be included in previous generations, but I understand that game development of triple A titles is extremely expensive. I don't buy DLC and I only buy games on sale now that $60 is the standard price. If enough people do that, maybe Sega will think of different, less odious ways to make their money.



TLDR; Sega is the culprit, not CA. Alternatively, hate the game, not the player.

 

[Jungle Rhino]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I think day 1 DLC is a fact of life for AAA titles these days, an abhorrent practise that is solely there to encourage blind pre-ordering - usually by EA in a massive money grab by sucking the life out of a well loved franchise the have bought the rights to (see Dragon Age 2 and soon multitudes of ****ty Star Wars games).

Anyhow the one bright spot here is that CA seemed to have listened and got rid of any distributor exclusivity - I mean we could have had Athens from Amazon, Epirus from Steam, and Sparta from Play.com - as was the case with FotS. So I am THANKFUL to you CA for showing some common sense by not making anything exclusive.

What I would like clarified however is how we are able to access the Greek cultural pack if we choose to NOT preorder - can we pick it up on day1 for an additional charge? (how it should be) Or will it not be available until 6 months after release? (a filthy practise akin to exclusivity)

So CA you are doing alright by me so far - but please don't try and sell us the line that without the preorder bonus the Greek factions wouldn't be there - we know you are miliking us, but I don't mind becuase your games are typically fantastic and you deserve some milk money. Just please don't patronise us while you are doing it.

 

[GrudgeNL]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Lets assume that you actually meant that I think that *this* game is worth $10, otherwise your argument is just a silly strawman. And we wouldn't want that, would we? So anyway. If they want my money, then they need to make a moddable game. I made the mistake of pre-ordering Empire, and I'm not gunna do that again. I got no more than about 10 average hours out of Shogun 2 - so my expectations aren't great. The only reason I'm buying it at all is because of the faint hope that they'll do something I eventually like. It's really not my problem whether or not CA make money from me. Just like it's not their problem whether I like their game or not after I purchase it. And no, I don't realize that people paying what they think a game is worth will destroy the gaming industry. This is actually the basis of it and the reason why CA have been successful.

Capitalism 101: I'm not obligated to buy your product. It's your own fault if you sell it cheaper at a later point and then fail to make money because of it.

Oh, yeah. I'm not the one complaining. You are. I just offered up a piece of advice for people who don't like the price. Don't like it? Move somewhere with an economic system that sits in line with your views.

PS: if it upsets you that much, I'm willing to allow you to purchase the game for me at RRP. That should solve both of our problems.

I honestly don't care what you do with your money. I do care when you try to manipulate other people, by giving bad advice. Advice that will lead to game developers not being able to create videogames. And really, the only one who seems upset is you. Typing a giant wall of text, defending yourself against attacks I never made.

And really, if you read my message properly, which you obviously didn't, you'd realize I wasn't attacking you at all, just yet. Let me quote myself here.

If you feel games are not worth more than 10 dollars, than why do you even bother playing games at all?

I agree though I should've rephrased that a bit different. I thought the If was obvious. If you exchange the you's with one's, it'll become less of a personal attack.

 

[AngryTitusPullo]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

What I would like clarified however is how we are able to access the Greek cultural pack if we choose to NOT preorder - can we pick it up on day1 for an additional charge? (how it should be) Or will it not be available until 6 months after release? (a filthy practise akin to exclusivity)

You can buy the Greek pack on 3rd September onwards after you have bought Rome II on the same day. If you buy Rome II on 2nd September you'll get the Greek pack whether you want it or not.

You can see this already on Steam. Greek Pack available 3rd September 2013.

 

[Evariste]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

Anyhow the one bright spot here is that CA seemed to have listened and got rid of any distributor exclusivity - I mean we could have had Athens from Amazon, Epirus from Steam, and Sparta from Play.com - as was the case with FotS. So I am THANKFUL to you CA for showing some common sense by not making anything exclusive.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. It's bad enough that a game set in antiquity doesn't come with Greece in the box, but you're right, they could have easily done pre-order retailer exclusives, especially since all the other guys do it.

I want to kiss the hand of whichever CA producer it was that kept Sega from making them do this.

 

[Jungle Rhino]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

You can buy the Greek pack on 3rd September onwards after you have bought Rome II on the same day. If you buy Rome II on 2nd September you'll get the Greek pack whether you want it or not.

You can see this already on Steam. Greek Pack available 3rd September 2013.

Ok well that is fair enough - CA are dangling an incentive to the faithful to front up their money without having seen any reviews/demos or knowing if there are any game breaking bugs. Which is fine as we now have CHOICE. Take a risk on the game and get a free bonus or wait for the reviews and pay a little more for the same content. I think that is fair.

 

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I have no idea how black-dragon's idea deviate from mine.I feel that we are saying similar thing : That's the deal, take it or leave it. I just used more academic words cuz English is not my primary language.

Whatever~ ~

Great, this argument again. Of course they're not required to. But then are they required to make a good product at all? They can make Rome the only playable faction in the game (which you buy for 40 dollars) and each faction costs 2 dollars to unlock, but that's okay because if you purchase the custom battles addon you can play all these other factions for the meager sum of 5 dollars. If you can't see how you're being ripped off, you're just refusing to look at it from another point of view. It's clear that CA gets tons of money already. CA didn't go bankrupt from releasing expansion packs that actually added new content, like Kingdoms for M2TW, did they? They didn't barely make a profit when they didn't lock you out of factions already in the game and charge you 4 dollars to unlock them.

Of course they are not bound to provide a good game. But that's what you should EXPECT.

I don't expect this is the choice of CA, it's probably because of the market analysts over at SEGA. Just because I call out milking until the last drop, it does not mean I'm lashing out at CA.

Your example of a more extreme scenario will result in not much people buying that game. You are ripped off if you believe that you are buying something way greater than "only Rome as playable". However, if you do not pay for it, how are you ripped off? Are you telling me you felt ripped off even you did not pay a single buck? The bottom line is that the company has to be honest. CA already told you how many factions you are going to get. That's why, I said Day1 DLC is not the problem. The problem is something else.

They didn't barely make a profit when they didn't lock you out of factions already in the game and charge you 4 dollars to unlock them.

Saying "the company is trying to squeeze every single dollar out of the consumers' pockets" is the same argument as saying "the consumers are trying to save every single dollar from a purchase". How are you different from the game developer? You ask for more content at the same price, so that you gain more. They ask for more money for the same content, so they gain more. Don't the 2 demands look the similar? Both parties are just asking for as much as possible.

They can make a **** product and be honest about it so that no one will buy. They can make a very well product to earn our money. Both should not be wrong in the customers' eyes. They offer you the deal: you either accept it or reject it. The wrong thing that can occur though is they lie about their products and take away your money. If CA wish to shoot its own foot with a **** product, you gotta let them do it. He is not shooting at you~ ~

 

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

double posted

 

[Adreno]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

They do and now I'm gonna install a torrent-client, I'm not gonna support this day1 dlc BS.

hope it will give you a massive virus that burns down your computer

 

[Agent2P]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

As a whole I doubt anyone could really like day 1 DLC especially if you have to pay for it. As far as the Greek Cities DLC, it's depressing that those who don't pre-order will have to purchase it, I understand that it's "hype" DLC and to get people to pre-order but I'm not aware really as to what they translates to in a pure statistical sense compared to just releasing them in the game.

The gaming industry is in a very strange time right now it seems with many different monetary models being used, I disagree with many of them (microtransactions has a special place reserved in my own hell) but it's hard for me to be strongly against a lot of them without being able to see there finances. If they are using these extra fees as a way to pad bonuses for higher up's it would be extremely aggravating for me as opposed to using it to support the game and it's community. The gaming industry is pretty volatile, there seems to be a new high profile developer going under every month. I have no problem with paying whatever price as long as a company is honest with me about it's usage.

Creative Assembly's Shogun II unit packs were definitely a sore spot for me, to me that was plain nickel and diming but so far with Rome II we are getting a free day one faction as well as 3 more just for pre-ordering a.k.a. also free. While I get the apprehension it still is 4 more factions for free. It's a good gesture in contrast to Shogun II and I'm hoping to see it continue.

 

[roarer]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

As a whole I doubt anyone could really like day 1 DLC especially if you have to pay for it. As far as the Greek Cities DLC, it's depressing that those who don't pre-order will have to purchase it, I understand that it's "hype" DLC and to get people to pre-order but I'm not aware really as to what they translates to in a pure statistical sense compared to just releasing them in the game.

I understand why people dislikes Day 1 DLC. It feels like the original deal can be sweeter. The purchase of the core game can also include the DLC content. Its like you know that the dinner you took last night can be 5 bucks cheaper. What people usually do not consider is that if the content is included in the original deal, you will have to pay more for it.

 

[Agent2P]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I understand why people dislikes Day 1 DLC. It feels like the original deal can be sweeter. The purchase of the core game can also include the DLC content. Its like you know that the dinner you took last night can be 5 bucks cheaper. What people usually do not consider is that if the content is included in the original deal, you will have to pay more for it.

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you fully mean by your last sentence but I'm definitely liking the dinner analogy.

 

[Carach]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

You're the first person I've seen on this message board who is attributing the price of Rome 2 to the optional DLC rather than the much more likely and logical reason that CA is just pricing their game at the same price as every single other major PC release for the past three years.

But yeah. Your conclusion is so much more "blatantly obvious."

i may not play much these days, but ive bought games in the last 3 years and none of them have been 45quid.

cannot believe people are defending such pricing.

I've got the game pre-ordered for 27 pounds UK which is cheaper than what I payed for shogun 2 so yes for me it is free.

direct us to this amazing place so we dont all get ripped off please?

I feel like there are some commies in this thread.

in the real world some of my customers rip on me for being 'blue' in a 'red' area, i wont be heard defending anything labour have ever done, yet here on the internet, i am just another socialist scumbag. lol....i do love this site sometimes.

 

[Mirglip]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

I have no idea how black-dragon's idea deviate from mine.I feel that we are saying similar thing : That's the deal, take it or leave it. I just used more academic words cuz English is not my primary language.

Whatever~ ~



Your example of a more extreme scenario will result in not much people buying that game. You are ripped off if you believe that you are buying something way greater than "only Rome as playable". However, if you do not pay for it, how are you ripped off? Are you telling me you felt ripped off even you did not pay a single buck? The bottom line is that the company has to be honest. CA already told you how many factions you are going to get. That's why, I said Day1 DLC is not the problem. The problem is something else.




Saying "the company is trying to squeeze every single dollar out of the consumers' pockets" is the same argument as saying "the consumers are trying to save every single dollar from a purchase". How are you different from the game developer? You ask for more content at the same price, so that you gain more. They ask for more money for the same content, so they gain more. Don't the 2 demands look the similar? Both parties are just asking for as much as possible.

They can make a **** product and be honest about it so that no one will buy. They can make a very well product to earn our money. Both should not be wrong in the customers' eyes. They offer you the deal: you either accept it or reject it. The wrong thing that can occur though is they lie about their products and take away your money. If CA wish to shoot its own foot with a **** product, you gotta let them do it. He is not shooting at you~ ~

Telling someone to "deal with it" is just a failed argument. It's a blanket that can be used on pretty much anything, like buggy gameplay, poor A.I, etc. Just because someone doesn't like it, it doesn't mean that they're just a whiner with no point. Telling someone to deal with it is just showing that you're brushing away their argument and not taking in whatever they're saying.


Thankfully, you're not demonstrating that kind of behavior.

Your example of a more extreme scenario will result in not much people buying that game. You are ripped off if you believe that you are buying something way greater than "only Rome as playable". However, if you do not pay for it, how are you ripped off? Are you telling me you felt ripped off even you did not pay a single buck? The bottom line is that the company has to be honest. CA already told you how many factions you are going to get. That's why, I said Day1 DLC is not the problem. The problem is something else.

Yes, it is extreme. But here's the thing - where do you draw the line? Day 1 DLC has been getting extensively larger. Let's put it in a less extreme scenario - Carthage isn't playable. The devs announce that you have to pay extra money to unlock the faction of Carthage for the game you buy for 60$. Just because CA announces that the "cultural add-on" or whatever will have to be unlocked, does that mean there is no justified criticism for it? The difference between you and me is that we draw the line at different places. There are definitely people who think something as minor as different unit skins should be included into the original game.

Saying "the company is trying to squeeze every single dollar out of the consumers' pockets" is the same argument as saying "the consumers are trying to save every single dollar from a purchase". How are you different from the game developer? You ask for more content at the same price, so that you gain more. They ask for more money for the same content, so they gain more. Don't the 2 demands look the similar? Both parties are just asking for as much as possible.

They can make a **** product and be honest about it so that no one will buy. They can make a very well product to earn our money. Both should not be wrong in the customers' eyes. They offer you the deal: you either accept it or reject it. The wrong thing that can occur though is they lie about their products and take away your money. If CA wish to shoot its own foot with a **** product, you gotta let them do it. He is not shooting at you~ ~

More content for the same price isn't what this is about. Say you bake a high-quality pie you want to sell. You and your customers know that the entire pie is worth 4$, but then you go ahead looking to make more money and cut out the crust, sell the rest of the pie for 4$, and offer the crust for another 2$. This is what CA is doing here - already developed content being sold in addition to the full price of the game - Skyrim was, what, 60$ upon release? A more relevant analogy would be if they took out horses from the game (mind you, horses were added in during development and already a completed feature) and sold a "stable location calibrator" for 3 dollars in addition to the 60$ of the original game.

If CA (let's analogize CA into a person) is a man wanting to shoot themselves in the foot, I'd go "What the hell are you thinking? Don't shoot yourself!", not let them find out on their own that they're about to be hospitalized. The consumer should do the best they can to help the developer make a great product (the suggestions thread the most obvious example), not just quietly wait for them to release a product and laud them if it's good or kick them into the dirt if it's bad.


And if the problem is something else, what do you think it is?



On the topic of pricing, it's possible that it's worth 60 dollars. Rome was worth the price I bought it for now, and I've found myself enjoying games more and more. Some 2$ games can catch your interest for two minutes or two years, the same thing with 60$ games. As a rule of thumb, if I find myself playing the game more hours than the amount of dollars I purchased it for, the game was worth the purchase.

 

[LaLaLand]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

You can feel whatever you bloody well want. I am happy as hell for it.


The content is not part of the Game. It represent extra work for CA design team to make post development stage of R2. I'm getting their work for free since I'm buying the game anyway. I'm happy.


Sound, selfish reasoning.
¨
All you holier-than-thu "gamin industry is under threat you should be mad" fanatics can go eat a cabbage for all I care.

 

[ptoss1]

Re: How Should We Feel About Day One DLC?

You can feel whatever you bloody well want. I am happy as hell for it.


The content is not part of the Game. It represent extra work for CA design team to make post development stage of R2. I'm getting their work for free since I'm buying the game anyway. I'm happy.


Sound, selfish reasoning.
¨
All you holier-than-thu "gamin industry is under threat you should be mad" fanatics can go eat a cabbage for all I care.

I do eat cabbage. Almost every single day.