DLC Model Discussion

Choose the applicable option

  • I have purchased DLC for Civ5, and I like the current model.

    Votes: 138 37.3%

  • I have purchased DLC for Civ5, but I dislike the current model.

    Votes: 96 25.9%

  • I own Civ5, but have not purchased DLC. However, I like the current model.

    Votes: 15 4.1%

  • I own Civ5, but have not purchased DLC. I dislike the current model.

    Votes: 84 22.7%

  • I do not own Civ5, but I like the current DLC model.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I do not own Civ5, and I dislike the current DLC model.

    Votes: 11 3.0%

  • I neither like or dislike the current DLC model.

    Votes: 26 7.0%
  • Total voters
    370
Derrick CB:

FWIW, I haven't bought any DLC whatsoever, so it's not true that Firaxis is forcing anyone to buy anything, and at the same time frame when I was playing Civ IV, there was nothing to be had in the way of additional official content, free or otherwise.

Frankly, I'm not getting where the rage is coming from on so many who are against DLC. If it's so easy that modders could make it, then shouldn't we just be ignoring the DLC altogether and going to the modders?

I think that there's a small population of extremely vocal Civvers who feel entitled to free content from Firaxis for reasons that are beyond my ken. It is clear that the market in general is very happy with the DLC model, and the content that's being made available through the model.
 
Sonereal said:
"Why are we paying five bucks for a single civilization?"

Answer: The market allows for it.

Content isn't really the scarce unless you're solely looking at the Civilization V market, in which case yes, players who love Civilization V will naturally buy up Civilzation V DLC. If you're looking at the entire video game market, then I can say your point doesn't work. If I don't feel like paying for DLC in Civilization, I could just get another game (and I did get Divine Wind).
Click to expand...

I'm talking about Civ V and I'm comparing expansion packs to DLC. DLC is by practice greedier, if you will. This is easily demonstrated through the fact that they charge 5 bucks for a civ. It is disputable whether or not $5 is a lot, but that isn't the point I'm arguing. My point is that Firaxis is able to sell a single civ at such prices because there is a scarcity for additional content in the game. If there is a high demand for something which scarce, then it is more expensive, but you already knew that.

Firaxis, is releasing DLC in small portions so that they can charge more everything they sell.

Sonereal said:
Then why isn't the price for DLC going down little by little as it's released over time. :rolleyes: Oh yeah, because the market doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Click to expand...

Mainly because it hasn't been that long and there is still a demand for it. High demand and low supply equals high prices. This is perfectly within the scope of simple economics and market forces.
 
Just a little math.

35 agree with DLC, with the majority of people being ones who bought them (In fact, that is the single biggest option chosen) Meanwhile 30 disagree with DLC, and its spread out between all three groups.

So, its not a matter of popular vs. unpopular opinion, as both ideas are about the same popularity-wise.
 
Personally, I have enjoyed the DLC the last several months. It's kept the base game fresh longer and the scenarios have been fun, and I believe the DLC has supported a longer patch process than the game would have otherwise gotten (and the patching was sorely needed). So I do like what Firaxis has done so far.

However, I think it's now time for an expansion. They've done a lot balancing and improved many aspects of the game, but now the game needs new mechanics to stay fresh. Maybe religion, maybe some kind of espionage, definitely more stuff for builders in the Modern era, new units to fill some gaps, and some significant expansion of city state gameplay. That's traditional expansion material, and that's what I hope comes next (although they can take their time IMO).

I guess that puts me in the camp of "Liked the DLC so far, but looking for a real expansion next."
 
Sonereal said:
Again, this only really matters to the players who only play Civilization V. Someone who plays Civilization V AND other games and if THOSE games have DLC, then Firaxis's plan of artificially keeping prices "high" ($5 isn't a lot) wouldn't work. The fact is is that $5 isn't really a lot of money for a civilization (and more often than not, a scenario) and the market is willing to take it. So, the only way your argument would make any sense is if every single video game publisher is in a giant price fixing trust.

Overall, content isn't scarce for players who don't play Civilization V only.



True. But you haven't convinced me that Firaxis (and by extension, every other video game publisher) is conspiring together to make the $5 CivV DLC acceptable by making the DLC of every other game near the same price.
Click to expand...

Ok. In your opinion, would Firaxis get away with selling civs at $5 each if they released 18 of them at a time?
 
of course people will get angry if all civs are released all at once for that kind of price. That is why they spread out the release time.
 
jtb1127 said:
I'll respond with one of my classic "high school debate" type of answers which I know a certain Mr. AP Economics hates: :p

So do drug dealers. What's your point?
Click to expand...

That rhetoric is absolute hyperbole but the point gets across all the same. The need to make money is no justification.
 
Glassmage said:
of course people will get angry if all civs are released all at once for that kind of price. That is why they spread out the release time.
Click to expand...

That would never happen, one point of the dlc marketing is to keep your interest in the game prolonged. If they released everything at once they would just shot themselves in the foot and lose customers in the long run. Also by release everything at once you are flooding the market and will loose sales and you do not want to do that.

One DLC a quarter is making people come back to the game and keep interest up also you can market each DLC individually. Also it makes the DLC look and feel a lot less expensive. Also it fuels more content if they sell well.
 
Martin Alvito said:
Ironically, the losers are the satisfied customers buying the DLC at the high price. If you refuse to buy the DLC or insist on waiting for a discount, you really haven't got a leg to stand on.
Click to expand...

Winning and losing is in the mind of the consumer. It is not a label that can be assigned by a third party. If I find the price acceptable for the product, and I purchase and am satisfied with the product, I win. If I am not satisfied, I wasted my money and lost.

In the case of the DLC model, a purchase of $3-$10 is a drop in the bucket for me. I rather enjoy getting the DLC upon release, and I am completely satisfied with the purchase - win.

If consumers didn't buy products at the higher initial price, companies would not be able to continue providing it, and the practice would eventually be discontinued. The fact that many of us purchase the product upon release allows them to continue the practice. Everyone wins: first adopters and price concious consumers alike if satistied with their purchases.
 
I voted "I neither like or dislike the current DLC model." Would I rather have an expansion pack? Yeah, I would. But DLC is the trend these days and I enjoy the game, and as a result have no problem paying for DLC (minus the lame preorder bonus map packs that are a complete ripoff). The civs and scenarios have for the most part been well done, and the DLC sales help support the Civ franchise and help to encourage continued support of the game. If Firaxis puts together an expansion pack, I'll be really happy, and I hope they put one together at one point, but for the time being, I can live with DLC. Does it cost more in the long run? Likely, depending on when you buy it (there's some really cheap Steam sales sometimes) but I still feel I get my money's worth out of it.
 
In my opinion it is just a way to get more money from the series because they wont gonne make a civ 6 simple as that...

Really dislike the idea at all expensions packs are way better at all.

Every company that is going to stop a serie is going to add dowloudable contents to get more money.

Look at red alert 3 instead of releasing expansion pack in stores you can only dowload it...
And that was the final part of red alert series


It feels like a rip of because once you bought it and an new one's come out you are like right...
And ifyou calculate it expansion pack are cheeper and more people will buy it some people like me just dont buy things from the internet
 
Derrick CB said:
That rhetoric is absolute hyperbole but the point gets across all the same. The need to make money is no justification.
Click to expand...

I don't see why not, frankly. Are any posters here laboring under the misapprehension that 2k is anything BUT a for-profit company?
 
Roxlimn said:
I don't see why not, frankly. Are any posters here laboring under the misapprehension that 2k is anything BUT a for-profit company?
Click to expand...

Yes exactly. Suddenly game devs no longer need money?

The only real proof that DLC is somehow a ripoff would come in the form of evidence that the devs are rolling in profits already from the game sales. Because some people think a product is too expensive does not actually prove the developers of said product are rich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Crezth
  • Locked
  • Poll
Regarding a recently necro’d thread
Replies
5
Views
378
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
Quintillus
Sticky Re-Org
Replies
2
Views
246
Quintillus
Quintillus
Gori the Grey
Splitting a new thread off from an existing one
Replies
3
Views
677
Aiken_Drumn
Aiken_Drumn
Birdjaguar
[RD] War in Gaza: News Thread
22 23 24
Replies
460
Views
16K
aelf
aelf
C
[BNW] Unlock existing UU & UB for an existing civ ( especially shoshone pathfinder )
Replies
4
Views
287
Caocao84
C
Top Bottom