DLC Model Discussion

Recently there have been quite a few contentious discussions going on about the merits or drawbacks of DLC. Rather than continuing to have multiple separate discussions spread out across threads where it's not particularly relevant, we're setting up this thread to serve the purpose of the venue for such a topic.

So the basic thread question is: do you like the current DLC model (whereby smaller additions are sold for lower prices than an expansion)? What are the advantages and disadvantages? What do you think would be the best model for releasing additional content for Civ5?

A few ground rules:

• As always, post within the forum rules, or you risk infraction.
• Specifically, remain civil at all times. Address the points made without attacking the posters making them.
• More specifically, comments such as 'those that buy DLC are idiots' or 'those that hate DLC are idiots' will be infracted.
• Remember, this is a discussion. Ensure your post makes a positive contribution to that discussion.
• Do not post other threads on this topic, and do not make other posts on this topic in threads where it is not relevant. The purpose of this thread is to prevent other threads from being derailed on this topic.

Thank you for this.
If this is stickied somewhere it should be the end of DLC SUX spamming.

Just a suggestion...

I don't feel particularly strong one way or the other. IMO there needs to be options in the thread for neither like nor dislike the current model.

I voted 'purchased and like" but I can fully understand why people might not like it. In other games DLC can rip you off but I trust what they have given in Civ5 and I really appreciate the patches. I think it shows the devs there is interest in this game and they are not beating a dead horse (which is was almost at release lets be honest).

Also getting a steady trickle of cash is better than getting a lump sum in 1.5 years time. (expansion model) I think as a company, developing a boxed expansion when you can only profit from it on release in 18 months, is borderline irresponsible in our economy. Boxed games are dying a death, I think companies can't sell boxes in Asia for example, they can only profit from Free2Play type models etc. I paraphrase this from a Blizzard interview I read about how they can"t sell boxes in Asia. That's just the way things are.

Only thing I would say is that if they are going heavy DLC model, then the base game should have been cheaper on release. 30€ is fairer. Of course it costs 30€ now or cheaper, I believe becasue they realised they can sell the game for cheap then make money from DLC. They should have done this on original release 10 months ago.

So far, I think the current system is pretty decent. It lets the player buy what they want at the pace they want to augment their game play experience. Personally, I've only bought the Korean Expansion. Also, the more thrifty members can wait for Steam Sales to purchase some DLC that they wouldn't normally buy.

What I think might be an issue down the road is if/when an official traditional expansion set comes out.

Will the previous DLC be part of the expansion set? If this is so, do the people who have purchased the DLC already get a discount?

I think that this could lead to an issue of the players feeling that they are paying double. Since it is documented which DLC each player has purchased on Steam, maybe a discount up to a certain percentage can be provided to players who buy the (potential) expansion set.

My two cents (or in Korea: 20 Won).

I really like the DLC. The only issue I can see is if they do release an expansion that includes all the DLC. Why? Because a lot of people would feel that they'd end up paying the some of the DLC "twice" if they buy the expansion (presumably with more than just DLC in it). If they did go down this route they'd definitely have to give some kind of free DLC down the track for people who purchased DLC and the expansion. All hypothetical at this point though.

The model is good, and I think it is better than expansion somewhat. Yes, the devs are milking us for money, but we decide whether to buy DLC's or not, and we get to pick and choose.

Ok, I will begin yet another post as to why the DLC model in unacceptable and should be immediately removed.

First I will sight a few definitions:

-ripoff:exploitation, especially of those who cannot prevent or counter it.
-bargain: an agreement between parties settling what each shall give and take or perform and receive in a transaction.
-DLC: digital media that is sold online to add more content to video games. This media is typically cheap (or thought to be cheap) and comes with several items/accessories to enhance the gaming experience
-expansion: the addition of more content to a video game but it is differentiated from DLC due to the fact that it adds much more content to the video game. Therefore, it is usually a bit more expensive than a single DLC would be, but it is praised for all it's content
-DLCist: A word I made up to describe someone who buys DLC
-expansionist: A word I didn't make up, but usually has a completely different definition. For this purpose, an expansionist is someone who favors expansions pacts to DLC

Now I shall begin the arguments

For many years the Civilization series has been releasing high quality video games for the price they were worth. When it comes to prices, the series was at it's peak in 2007 when the expansion Beyond the Sword (BTS) was released. BTS is quite possibly the greatest expansion that has every came out for a video game and it set the standards for all expansions to come. These standards are the very reason I will not tolerate the DLC model for one minute. BTs proved that the developers were capable of bargains and giving the customers what they wanted.
Here is a list of everything BTS Included (I will not simply post the link like I usually do because I am afraid people are not taking the time to actually look over it):
New Civs
-Babylon
-Byzantine
-Dutch
-Ethiopia
-Holy Rome
-Khmer
-Maya
-Native American
-Portugal
-and Sumeria
Please Note: Each of these Civs comes with a unique units and building!

New Leaders
-Abe Lincoln
-Boudica
-Pericles
-Suleiman
-Darius I

New Buildings
-Customs House
-Industrial Park
-Intelligence Agency
-Levee
-Public Transportation
-Security Bureau

New Units
-Airship
-Anti-Tank
-Attack Submarine
-Cuirassier
-Guided Missile
-Missile Cruiser
-Mobile Artillery
-Mobile SAM
-Paratrooper
-Privateer
-Ship of the Line
-Stealth Destroyer
-Tactical Nuke

New Wonders
-Apostolic Palace
-Cristo Redentor
-Mausoleum of Maussollos
-Shwedagon Paya
-Statue of Zeus

National Wonders
-Moai Statues
-National Park

Changed Wonders
-Sistine Chapel
-Stonehenge

Techs
-Advanced Flight
-Aesthetics
-Laser
-Military Science
-Stealth
-Superconductors

Tech Tree Modifications

Corporations
-Aluminum Inc,
-Cereal Meals
-Civilized Jewelers
-Creative Constructions
-Mining Inc.
-Sid's Sushi Co.
-Standard Ethanol Co.

Espionage

New Victory Conditions

Colonies

Scenarios
-Afterworld
-Broken Star
-Charlemagne
-Crossroads of the World
-Defense
-Fall from Heaven - Age of Ice
-Final Frontier
-Gods of Old
-Next War
-Rhye's and Fall of Civilization
-Road to War

The End

Depending on where you live, Beyond the Sword cost around $30.00 (USD!)
Take one more look at everything BTS came with and then note the cost. What was the last DLC you bought? Was it the recent Korean DLC, the one that everyone was so hyped about? What did Korea come with?

New Civilizations
-Korea

Wonders
-The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus
-the Statue of Zeus,
-the Temple of Artemis

Scenarios
-Korean Scenario
-Wonder Race scenario

Price: $7.99

Something is definitely fishy here. I couldn't help but notice that this Korean DLc came with 6 new items in total and it for some reason costs eight dollars. Yet BTS had ten times the amount of content and it only cost $30. If you get your proportions right than BTS should be well over $100! But it isn't! Why? Because it is worth $30. So if BTS isn't under priced, than the Korean DLC must be overpriced. How much should Korea cost? My estimate comes to around Three Dollars. Clearly the Korean civ is ripping us off. It is a ripoff and everyone should be able to see it. But due to the fact that people continue to buy DLC, I have been forced to buy them too. Why would the developers release one big expansion when they can make 10 times more money with 1/10 the content. Consumers see the price of DLC and say, "ohh for the price of lunch I can have soo much fun". That is mad mentality to have when buying video game products and it is the exact mentality that has lead to the mainstreaming of the DLC model, a model which in my opinion, is going to destroy video games forever. Just look at the new Civworld. That is DLC at it's finest. You can't even play the game without dropping a dollar, there, a dollar here, but it adds up so quickly. Civworld is the successor to civ v and if we don't stop civ iv will look the same way. 2k and Firaxis are taking over the video gae series I have always loved and mutating it into an alien that sucks our wallets.

Here is a post from a very intelligent man and it sums up (literally) all that is useful of DLC

Thoughtful Thug said:

With the newly arrived announcement for two spankin DLCs, I have nothing to offer but my middle finger.

Downloadable Content For This Game
$4.99
Sid Meier’s Civilization V: Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar II)
Cha-Ching!
$2.99
Civilization V: Cradle of Civilization - Mediterranean
Cha-Ching!
$2.99
Civilization V: Cradle of Civilization - Asia
Cha-Ching!
$2.99
Civilization V: Cradle of Civilization - Americas
Cha-Ching!
$2.99
Civilization V: Cradle of Civilization - Mesopotamia
Cha-Ching!
$7.49
Double Civilization and Scenario Pack: Spain and Inca
Cha-Ching!
$4.99
Civilization and Scenario Pack: Polynesia
Cha-Ching!
$4.99
Civilization and Scenario Pack: Denmark - The Vikings
Cha-Ching!
$4.99
Civilization V: Explorer’s Map Pack
Cha-Ching!

$7.49 for both Korea and Wonders of the Ancient World (or buy one of them for $4.99)

Sum total for all of the separate DLCs (with the exception for special deals or buying some of them in packages) is around $$$$ 49.39 US Dollars!!! Add that to the damned game ($49.99 US Dollars) =

$ 99.39

Click to expand...

Have any of you noticed that the DLC combined add up to almost as much as civ V did itself? Something is wrong if that is the case.

Now I'll easily list the pros and cons of the two

DLC
-Gives players minimal content
-allows developers to ripoff die hard fans
-flexibility??
-Can be quickly dowloaded off the internet (the exact reason the developers love them)

Expansions
-More content
-Cheaper
-Make fans happy
-No ripoff

I have made it very clear why DLC is bad. Actually, DLC itself has made it very clear. It is completely obvious that the expansionists are right when they refuse to purchase the sinning material. DLCists are are impatient and unconscious with their money. Because of the DLCists, the video game market is being driven by DLC and no longer expansions. I refuse to buy the DLC for the very reasons I have provided. Please, do not call me out dated, for there is still time to change. We have the power to change things. We shall not idle by as corporate greed dominates the greatest video game series of all time! BTS set the standards and I will not tolerate anything less. Firaxis has been capable of pleasing the fans before and now I urge them to continue doing so. If they have any respect for the fans than they should cease the vile practice. Civilization players have never just eaten what was shoved in their mouths. We are not sheep! We never have been sheep! Do not treat us like sheep!

PieceOfMind said:

Just a suggestion...

I don't feel particularly strong one way or the other. IMO there needs to be options in the thread for neither like nor dislike the current model.

Click to expand...

That's me as well, I don't mind the current model, but that's just in general... I do see some problems with multiplayer due to everyone ending up with a different package.
And also now there's a 'Wonders of the World' being released with some extra buildings being put in the regular game, so people with those buildings will be playing a somewhat different game than others. Communication problems about the game will develop.

Especially strategy options becoming different between one game and the other is something I'm not fond of, I would rather see that as part of one big expansion pack for sure.

I really like the DLC model. It's a win-win situation for both the consumers as for the producers.

It assures us of a steady stream of 'mini-expansions', which keeps the game fresh and interesting. It also makes it so that the producer needs to keep a certain level of quality, as when the quality is below par less people will buy a DLC and they get less income. It keeps pressure on the kettle.
Also the ability to customize what you do and do not want to get for your game is a good thing, it let's people choose and mix 'n match what they want their game to be like.
And as a last thing it also makes sure that the developer keep pushing out patches. Of course they should, but most developers don't, or they only put out one zero-day patch.

An expansion is a big gamble for both parties. Does the producer sell enough to break even? (And that also makes the willingness for a big investment less). And does the gamer get good value for money?
It also makes the player wait a long time with nothing much added to the game (apart from bugfixes).
Also the 'fire and forget'-nature of expansion may reduce the willingness of the developer to patch the game.

Mind you, BTS was a great expansion, absolutely amazing, incredible value for money, but it was also an exception to the rule, imho, and not something to have as reasonable/realistic comparison material. And the Civ-series is no exception to meager expansions, the quality (and value for money) really differs from expansion to expansion (eg. C3PTW vs C3C, C4WL vs C4BTS, etc).

Also I would like to say that Firaxis has a good track record for getting patches out, so the patch-related arguments for DLC don't hold hundred percent true for Firaxis, but for the concept of DLC as a whole I think it does.

Of course the price can be something to argue over, but the model as it stands is really nice.

My gaming experience is adaptative and if the industry prefers developing and distributing their products via a DLC model - it simply means their work must be paid instead of being consistently pirated.
In fact, real customers invest *IN* Firaxis (and 2K) when they purchase anything of value.

Thus, money spent equals someone keeping a JOB. Otherwise, they'll certainly stop providing games to the market of potential sales.
I even pay to type this message online and some ISP sysop is tending a server feed.

2011+ Global Economics & Cloud computing trends, get used to it.

Moderator Action: I just added the last option to the poll.

jtb1127 said:

DLCists are are impatient and unconscious with their money. Because of the DLCists, the video game market is being driven by DLC and no longer expansions.

Click to expand...

Moderator Action: This sort of labelling is not acceptable. Firstly, don't use the term 'DLCist' (because there is no need for labels), and secondly, don't paint a group of other members as 'impatient and unconscious with their money,' followed by accusations beginning, 'because of the DLCists...'

I like current DLC. Like some people say, if you don't like to spend the money on the DLC, then don't buy it. At least you are getting the patches for free right? For people who doesn't like DLC, just wait for the expansion pack perhaps or did you really think all these DLC should be free of charge?...

Dokebi said:

I like current DLC. Like some people say, if you don't like to spend the money on the DLC, then don't buy it.

Click to expand...

That is completely unfair to say. Because people continue to buy DLC, the developers continue to sell them. There is nothing else for me. There is not a hint that they ever will release an expansion so I either have waste my money and let the ripoff continue or be left out in the cold while everyone talks about their cool new toys. I believe change is possible so I won't buy any more DLC, but it really isn't as black and white as you're trying to paint it.

Dokebi said:

At least you are getting the patches for free right?

Click to expand...

Do honestly think that the developers after releasing an incomplete game because of their pushy stock holders, would even think about charging us? That would be the most cruel and unusual thing I have every heard. How could you even say that?

Dokebi said:

For people who doesn't like DLC, just wait for the expansion pack perhaps or did you really think all these DLC should be free of charge?...

Click to expand...

No I don't think they should be free, I think they shouldn't even sell them at all. And if they do sell them they shouldn't charge up to three times more than the content is worth.

Huge fan of the DLC, bought every single one so far. Keep them coming.

jtb1127 said:

That is completely unfair to say. Because people continue to buy DLC, the developers continue to sell them. There is nothing else for me. There is not a hint that they ever will release an expansion so I either have waste my money and let the ripoff continue or be left out in the cold while everyone talks about their cool new toys. I believe change is possible so I won't buy any more DLC, but it really isn't as black and white as you're trying to paint it.

Click to expand...

Well it will be bundled together and sold at big discount on Steam at one point that is sure. So total it together after 18 months or whatever time a traditional expansion takes, add a 66% discount and you get the same deal as a traditional expansion. You aren't losing out.

We that buy a DLC as soon as it comes out know we are paying a bit over price maybe, but we also rationalise it as going into development of the game. I haven"t got the new DLCs as I want to get some DLC from another game I play to support that. I can afford it but I give myself a budget like 5€ a month because I like most am also unused to this model. I don't think it's bad though, only good really as long as the content is acceptable.

It's also unrealistic to expect every addition to be BtS or BroodWar standard. These were somewhat groundbreaking expansions.

To be honest I have no idea how anyone can complain about DLC. Why? Let's consider the options here:

* New DLC released ~$5:

Want to buy it? Then buy it. If not then don't buy it. If you don't want to pay $5 then wait for one of those steam sales. Too impatient, then buy it at $5!

The only complaint that can really be had is that they're not making expansions, but to be honest we don't know that they're not. There's no reason that they won't make an expansion, they might, they might not, but let's wait and see what happens.

Thanks for the new thread. Very good idea.

Great post by jbt1127. That sums up very well how I feel about the situation as well.
Civ fans are getting milked here. We are getting less content and paying more for that privilege.

If there is a proper expansion with BTS like content for $30 then I'll change my tune.
I'm not holding my breath though. Between Civ World, their new upcoming RTS and churning out DLC, I don't think they have the resources for that.

So, in the future I'll support companies that put out proper expansion packs like Paradox. Any DLC they sell is purely cosmetic like sprites. They are also included in complete editions as a rule.

Sonereal said:

Everyone knows that an expansion is cheaper overall than several DLC.

Click to expand...

With a slight difference that the DLC are on sale a lot earlier than an expansion pack would be out, even. Which balances everything out price-time-wise.
Basically after a year you can have one expansion pack at full price, or a bunch of DLC at half price.
The big difference is for people that want to pay full price as soon as the DLC are out and buy them ahead of sales, they pay an 'early adopters'-fee.

Say next month there's another sale with 50% off, then you'd pay $13,75 for 6 civs and 4 scenarios. One can hardly call that a ripoff.