Advertisement
Civilization Fanatics' Center

Go Back   Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions

Notices

View Poll Results: How will the availability of DLC affect your decision to buy Civ5?
DLC makes me more likely to buy the game, I may buy DLC. 18 7.00%
DLC makes me more likely to buy the game, I will NOT buy DLC. 0 0%
DLC will not affect my decision to buy the game, I may buy DLC. 78 30.35%
DLC will not affect my decision to buy the game, I will NOT buy DLC. 44 17.12%
DLC makes me less likely to buy the game, I may buy DLC. 29 11.28%
DLC makes me less likely to buy the game, I will NOT buy DLC. 61 23.74%
I will not buy the game, because of DLC. 27 10.51%
Voters: 257. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Jun 01, 2010, 10:27 AM   #21
Rusty Edge
Deity
 
Rusty Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cheeseland
Posts: 2,831
DLC makes me less likely to buy the game, I will NOT buy DLC.

Leaders, units, civs, wonders, and other additions to the core game should only be sold as expansions.

IF premium DLC is restricted to scenarios, or things that support modding like map editers, unit makers, or add eyecandy without touching gameplay such as user interface enhancements, music packs, throne rooms and palaces, intros and victory movies, I would welcome that.
__________________
Civ IV BTS /Huge/Marathon/Single Player/Mods
History in the Making ,Civ IV Road to War , Legends of Revolution , History of the Three Kingdoms , and Grand Inquisitions.
Rusty Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 01, 2010, 04:02 PM   #22
Akka
Moody old mage.
 
Akka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Facing my computer.
Posts: 9,450
DLC are a bane on the face of gaming, and a slippery slope toward ripping off the consumer.
If you're not an idiot with short-term view, you can easily realize that paying disproportionate amount of money for tiny amount of content is just a way to encourage publishers into making games out of micro-transaction, and selling you the same content in pieces.
__________________
If violence didn't solve your problem... Well, you just haven't been violent enough.
Akka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 01, 2010, 05:21 PM   #23
Savoir10
Warlord
 
Savoir10's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 215
DLC will make no difference to my buying the game. The DLC would have to be exceptional and really cheap for me to even consider it.

I have never purchased DLC in the past, however this is Civ and I'm not closing myself off to the possiblility of getting DLC in the future.
Savoir10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 01, 2010, 07:55 PM   #24
3 EMS
King
 
3 EMS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 686
Ahriman wrote:
Quote:
Its important not to give a false picture; extra goodies on release is one thing. A string of Dragon Age-style for-purchase DLC is very different. And the latter is what most people think of when they hear DLC these days.
Since you mentioned it. With steams ability to coerce upgrades, will there be in-game advertising(icon) inserted into the game every time new DLC becomes available? I don't think I'd like that much. I can live with the DLC and would even buy it if I percieved value. I couldn't take my CIV being defaced with in-game ads.
3 EMS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 01, 2010, 08:36 PM   #25
darkarrow56
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 38
i'll probably get the game since ive played civ2 civ 2 test of time civ 3 and civ 4 but i WILL NOT buy dlc's unless modders force me too like rise of mankind and fall from heaven

empire total war only has a little pop up showing at loadup i think but sup com 2 has a window that opens so cross your fingers that its the little pop up

Last edited by darkarrow56; Jun 01, 2010 at 08:41 PM.
darkarrow56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 02, 2010, 02:55 AM   #26
Phil Ken Sebben
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 42
Bring on the DLC!!! The more, the better. I hate having to wait for expansion packs to get the stuff I want. Now I have a choice to buy things that fit my tastes, and I can leave the unimportant stuff.

DLC is awesome. Best thing to happen to gaming in a long time.
Phil Ken Sebben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 02, 2010, 03:38 AM   #27
Osama Bin Davis
Warlord
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Ken Sebben View Post
Bring on the DLC!!! The more, the better. I hate having to wait for expansion packs to get the stuff I want. Now I have a choice to buy things that fit my tastes, and I can leave the unimportant stuff.

DLC is awesome. Best thing to happen to gaming in a long time.
yes when its done right, and probably 90% of the time it isn't.
Osama Bin Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 02, 2010, 12:02 PM   #28
Train
Warlord
 
Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 174
I don't like DLCs, specially with expansion packs already... Firaxis should pick one or another... otherwise you are buying in pieces something that would be already in the full game or in the next expansion as DLC, I don't like it.
DLC makes me less likely to buy the game, but I will definately buy the game!
About the DLC, I may buy them, depending on what they include.
Train is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 03, 2010, 03:16 AM   #29
PieceOfMind
Drill IV Defender
 
PieceOfMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,292
"DLC makes me more likely to buy the game, I will NOT buy DLC."

Seriously, who would vote that?
__________________
Tip: Forcing Steam's Offline Mode
Civ4 Mods: Advanced Combat Odds, PIG Mod(discontinued), HEX Mod(discontinued)
Suggestion: Try karadoc's K-Mod: Far Beyond the Sword
Read if bored: Zoom-To-Cursor, Good advice from Kaell for DX11 users, Nvidia beats AMD in Civ V
PieceOfMind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 03, 2010, 04:27 AM   #30
ori
Repair Guy

 
ori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Baden-Württemberg, Germany
Posts: 15,252
but I didn't want to miss an option
ori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 05, 2010, 09:34 PM   #31
Lemon Merchant
Mod Grrl
 
Lemon Merchant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Red Sector A
Posts: 3,735
Gender: Female
Images: 2
The whole DLC thing is part of the issue that is currently preventing me from pre-ordering Civ5. I will not buy software in easily digestible pieces, like those sound bytes on the telly for people with short attention spans.

As I see it, the entire DLC machine will cripple the grassroots appeal of the Civ series. Since it has now been announced that the game must be registered with Steam on activation, I did a little bit of thinking today. Steam is a gigantic online merchandising "warehouse", whose object is to make money, like any other corporation. Because of the nature of DLC, and the way that games are marketed with places like Steam, Impulse, etc., the business model tends to restrict the freedom of purchasers of those products in the way that they are able to use them.

Civ5 is supposed to be the "most moddable Civ ever!", according to the hype. Really? How can this work with DLC and Steam distribution?

I see a few possibilities:

1. The game will only be decently moddable using tools available through DLC. Also, relevant and important portions of the SDK will only be available through DLC. - Fail
2. The only workably functioning mods available will need to be sanctioned by Steam, and you may only get them from Steam, effectively shutting down most of Civ's online modding community. - Fail
3. You may have to pay a "handling" fee for downloading those mods, in effect making them DLC. - Fail
4. If you want to make your own mod, you may, but any DLC that you have will be incompatible with the mod, preventing the use of content for which you have paid good money. - Fail
5. Distributing your mod could potentially cause compatibility issues with those who want to use it, for reasons in #4 above. It cannot be used easily, so no one bothers with your mod. You have possibly made the best mod ever, but have completely wasted your time as no one can use it. - Epic fail.

Firaxis has made a point with the past few versions of Civ, that the game is what you make it. If you want to, you can change it up, make it different, make it your own. If you don't have any modding skill, you can still enjoy the efforts of others and play a whole number of literally different games. You can join a place like CFC, or Apolyton, or whatever, and you can chat with others playing the same mod as you are, swap stories, suggest improvements, get some help. Call me a pessimist, but I don't see that sort of community being around for Civ5. 2K has already stated that modded content will have an "approval or rating system", or at least a system of allowing complaints of inappropriate content to be addressed.

My fear is that they're going to take the freedom, flexibility, and sense of camaraderie away from the fan sites like this one, and make us pay for it. And we'll pay dearly for it, because we'll probably lose our vibrant little community of fanatics in the process.

No DLC for me. And no Civ5 until I'm convinced that places like this will still be relevant.
Lemon Merchant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 02:08 PM   #32
Avs
Warlord
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 110
The whole DLC debate is no different from the DRM debate for any game. People often will see DLC in one of two lights, either it being something that "should" have been in the game, or something that is completely unecessary and not worth buying. Furthermore, DLC used to be "free" and something that had no $ attached to it. After companies found out that people are willing to spend a little money (and for MW2, $15) for a few downloads, this idea became the new marketing kid on the block.

Why did it become so popular? It doesn't stop people from buying the actual game itself. Since the actual game still represents the gateway for DLC, and where lots of money is made, its a win win scenario. People buy the game. Some people will buy games if free DLC is offered. In this case this poll does not represent free DLC, probably because Civ DLC is virtually non existant. No Civ game in the past has had DLC. Warlords, Beyond the Sword, and other expansions are expansion packs. Expansions are fundamentally different generally due to size or content. However, there have been mods for Civ 4, which also further lessen the DLC want or need for CIV.

Looking at other games, lets say TF2 (bad example because its the best DLC example). TF2 came out as a solid game. It did not need "extra" stuff. The community could already create custom maps, so basically the game was finished on release. Yet over the last year or two countless patching and additions have been made to the game for free. New weapons, achievements, different game modes, new maps, community events, all of this is considered DLC at this point when adding new content. Civ did not have anything like this beyond patching bugs and maybe balance changes. You had to buy the expansions for new content.

Which brings me back to DLC. DLC is different for every game. You need to realize this when you sell games to your market. Its no different from a bonus deal, or savings that you might find in a supermarket (see buy 1 get 1 free type deal). Supermarkets still make money. You get extra stuff, which not necessarily increases your utility (fun/enjoyment) of the product. But its an incentive to spend whereas you may not be spending.

Lets talk about some of the points brought up:

DLC being required for modding doesn't make sense. No game has ever required DLC to make the game moddable, much less ask you to cough up money to make a game DLC. If the game wasn't moddable at the start (something they are saying isn't true), then perhaps this would be the case. But this is so far fetched that it isn't even worth discussing beyond this as there is no factual precedence to point to.

Another points from Lemon: Mods need to be sanctioned on Steam. This question has already been answered by 2K in other threads. Steam will not block or prevent the publishing of mods. Of course I don't know the details, but the idea that Steam is going to block some functionality of the game says that you don't understand really why they are using Steam, and that again this point has no precedence to indicate that it can happen.

"Handling Fees" for mods. Again, never will happen.Mods can still be distributed via direct downloads off any site, just like this one, and 2k has confirmed this. No DLC in the world has ever been pegged with Handling Fees that weren't already included in its retail cost. Why? Nobody is going to buy a DLC that has "shipping fees, handling fees" associated to a digital piece of content that has zero logistical cost. It does not make sense. These points that Lemon bring up are all stemming from the initial misinformed preconceptions.

Mods and DLC compatibility. DLC can be no different from expansion sets in the sense that ultimately its extra add ons to the core game. Like all mods from back to 1998, they need to either be updated to revamped to work with new core software. It has not changed since then, and this is how it worked in Civ4. There is no reason to assume that Mods or Expansions will mean the death of any mod, unless the author deliberately stops working on it. In addition, mods are free. If the software company has designed DLC to be unusable with mods, that is a problem they need to fix. This has happened in the past, no different from poor patching that creates new problems while fixing some of the old ones. But, unlike the other points, this can happen to anyone, but like the other points Lemon brings up, because it can happen to anyone (poor release code), its more of a moot argument rather than something specific to Civ.

Last point from Lemon: Nobody uses your mods due to compatibility issues even though its the "best mod ever". At this point you really seem to be arguing one sidedly against something that cannot be confirmed yet, but can exist in any game, making the point moot. Its like the argument, what if Civ5 shipped with TONS OF BUGS. Its not worth our money! But then someone will say it will be fixed through patching. Or better yet, who is to say its going to be shipped with a ton of bugs. Yes we can point to Civ4 having tons of things that needed fixing, but can you say that will be true for every new game released out there ever? The fact that we expect new games to not have bugs means that we generally expect no bugs, and don't assume bugs will be present in these games. Anyways, back to the point: If you waste your time creating a mod that nobody plays, its probably "not the best ever". If the mod somehow cant work because its not compatible with the game's DLC, its probably not finished yet. If DLC prevents mods from working, then that's something that needs to be patched. Let's look at Civ4. There are tons of mods that work right now. Why would it be any different? Why would DLC be any different from expansions in a code form of view? It adds something to the game. Mods choose to utilize it or not. Mods that do utilize the DLC will require the DLC. Mods that do not, don't. DLC's generally won't add large complexity additions to the game like Espionage or Religions. Leave that to expansions, which generally overhaul the game and will be incorporated into modding.

I think Civ is lucky to still have such a modding system, if at least on paper for Civ5. Few games allow us PC players to mod it to what we want these days. You should look at this from a positive perspective rather than negative.

Oh yeah, and don't forget: There is no confirmation that DLC is available for this game yet (the deluxe order edition doesn't count fyi).
Avs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 02:14 PM   #33
deanej
Deity
 
deanej's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York State
Posts: 4,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
DLC can be no different from expansion sets in the sense that ultimately its extra add ons to the core game.
Not true. In case you haven't noticed, with mods here at CFD, expansions are REQUIRED add-ons to the core game. Not extra. If you don't have BtS, there are very few mods for you.
deanej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 02:23 PM   #34
Avs
Warlord
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by deanej View Post
Not true. In case you haven't noticed, with mods here at CFD, expansions are REQUIRED add-ons to the core game. Not extra. If you don't have BtS, there are very few mods for you.
Not all mods require BTS, exactly what I said. Also, the point is that DLC doesn't have to conflict with mods. And, you say its "not true" when pointing out that its possible. Again, nobody has any evidence to say whether the programming for Civ5 is different or not where expansions or DLC will conflict. If you want to base your purchasing decision on theory rather than waiting until release time or even months after just to find out, then that is perfectly ok. It's interesting to note that the game is retaining so many things that have been dropped from other titles (like LAN support). And just so you get it, mods and DLC don't make up the full game. Therefore they shouldn't be the deciding factor in to whether you'd purchase the game or not unless you're set on playing mods exclusively or you feel these games aren't worth their weight in cash without it.
Avs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 02:32 PM   #35
deanej
Deity
 
deanej's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York State
Posts: 4,859
Other than RFC, can you find any current mods for vanilla and Warlords? I certainly don't know of any.
deanej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 05:53 PM   #36
Grouchey
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 86
DLC really cheapens the experience of owning a game. Expansion packs are better for consumers.
Grouchey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 06:31 PM   #37
isndl
Chieftain
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
The whole DLC debate is no different from the DRM debate for any game. People often will see DLC in one of two lights, either it being something that "should" have been in the game, or something that is completely unecessary and not worth buying. Furthermore, DLC used to be "free" and something that had no $ attached to it. After companies found out that people are willing to spend a little money (and for MW2, $15) for a few downloads, this idea became the new marketing kid on the block.
I don't think anyone has a problem with the concept of DLC in and of itself. It's when the companies start charging additional fees for the DLC that it becomes a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Why did it become so popular? It doesn't stop people from buying the actual game itself. Since the actual game still represents the gateway for DLC, and where lots of money is made, its a win win scenario. People buy the game. Some people will buy games if free DLC is offered. In this case this poll does not represent free DLC, probably because Civ DLC is virtually non existant. No Civ game in the past has had DLC. Warlords, Beyond the Sword, and other expansions are expansion packs. Expansions are fundamentally different generally due to size or content. However, there have been mods for Civ 4, which also further lessen the DLC want or need for CIV.
It's a little unclear who you're referring to when making a statement like 'DLC is popular'. DLC may be becoming popular amongst the publishers, but I haven't heard of much enthusiasm from customers over the possibility of DLC - generally, it's dissatisfaction, particularly in the case of pre-order DLC specific to certain retailers. But they buy the DLC anyways, because they want the content and they have no alternatives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Looking at other games, lets say TF2 (bad example because its the best DLC example). TF2 came out as a solid game. It did not need "extra" stuff. The community could already create custom maps, so basically the game was finished on release. Yet over the last year or two countless patching and additions have been made to the game for free. New weapons, achievements, different game modes, new maps, community events, all of this is considered DLC at this point when adding new content. Civ did not have anything like this beyond patching bugs and maybe balance changes. You had to buy the expansions for new content.
TF2 is a bad example also because of the differences in the way the game is played. Civilization is designed to be able to generate new maps and allows relatively easy modification of the game mechanics, while TF2 maps must be hand-made and the client/server architecture pushes mechanics adjustments just outside of reach of the user.

In short, Civilization did not have DLC because the areas where DLC adds the most benefit were also the areas where Civilization was already strong. The expansion packs like BTS added a great deal of mechanics adjustments that could not be released piecemeal as DLC, because doing so would easily unbalance the game (see the class updates for TF2, often leaving certain classes unbalanced until more updates are released).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Which brings me back to DLC. DLC is different for every game. You need to realize this when you sell games to your market. Its no different from a bonus deal, or savings that you might find in a supermarket (see buy 1 get 1 free type deal). Supermarkets still make money. You get extra stuff, which not necessarily increases your utility (fun/enjoyment) of the product. But its an incentive to spend whereas you may not be spending.
Except that charging for DLC creates a conflict of interest. Historically, companies would try to pack as much stuff into the game as possible, leaving DLC as the things they didn't have time to finish and releasing it later when completed. Now the companies are being given incentive to cut content out of the initial release, to sell it for money afterward.

Look at the uproar over the Bioshock 2 DLC, which was already present on the disc except for a few hundred kilobytes of data to unlock it. That's the kind of behavior that most people concerned about DLC are afraid of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
DLC being required for modding doesn't make sense. No game has ever required DLC to make the game moddable, much less ask you to cough up money to make a game DLC. If the game wasn't moddable at the start (something they are saying isn't true), then perhaps this would be the case. But this is so far fetched that it isn't even worth discussing beyond this as there is no factual precedence to point to.
It's not the requirement of DLC that people are afraid of, but the effects the presence of DLC has on the mod scene. If a DLC pack adds a new civilization, what does the mod maker do? Should he create a clone of that civilization, or ban it despite positive historical flavor? If he clones it, he has to come up with new assets, unless he integrates the DLC assets, meaning the DLC is now required for the mod. And of course, you had best hope that you don't get hit by a cease and desist for creating a clone of the civilization that doesn't require the DLC.

That's the kind of problem DLC imposes. The mod scene becomes a mess of mods that require DLC and mods that reinvent the wheel because the users don't have the DLC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Another points from Lemon: Mods need to be sanctioned on Steam. This question has already been answered by 2K in other threads. Steam will not block or prevent the publishing of mods. Of course I don't know the details, but the idea that Steam is going to block some functionality of the game says that you don't understand really why they are using Steam, and that again this point has no precedence to indicate that it can happen.
Steam may not interact with the usage of mods, but will CiV itself have controls over the usage of mods? That hasn't been answered yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
"Handling Fees" for mods. Again, never will happen.Mods can still be distributed via direct downloads off any site, just like this one, and 2k has confirmed this. No DLC in the world has ever been pegged with Handling Fees that weren't already included in its retail cost. Why? Nobody is going to buy a DLC that has "shipping fees, handling fees" associated to a digital piece of content that has zero logistical cost. It does not make sense. These points that Lemon bring up are all stemming from the initial misinformed preconceptions.
"Handling fees" is just another name for arbitrary charges on top of what the item should cost. Why does it cost $15 for a few maps in MW2 when they're remakes of previously developed maps for a new game? It's certainly not because of the cost of production.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Mods and DLC compatibility. DLC can be no different from expansion sets in the sense that ultimately its extra add ons to the core game. Like all mods from back to 1998, they need to either be updated to revamped to work with new core software. It has not changed since then, and this is how it worked in Civ4. There is no reason to assume that Mods or Expansions will mean the death of any mod, unless the author deliberately stops working on it. In addition, mods are free. If the software company has designed DLC to be unusable with mods, that is a problem they need to fix. This has happened in the past, no different from poor patching that creates new problems while fixing some of the old ones. But, unlike the other points, this can happen to anyone, but like the other points Lemon brings up, because it can happen to anyone (poor release code), its more of a moot argument rather than something specific to Civ.
It's the idea that there will be a significant number of DLC packs that it becomes a problem. Expansion packs aren't really an issue, because they're typically limited to one or two for a single game, and they're announced a long time before they're actually released. When you could have dozens of DLC with little notification beforehand, it becomes a full-time job just keeping your mod compatible, let alone adding new features to it.

It's the same problem that we've always had, except for the part where it's worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Last point from Lemon: Nobody uses your mods due to compatibility issues even though its the "best mod ever". At this point you really seem to be arguing one sidedly against something that cannot be confirmed yet, but can exist in any game, making the point moot. Its like the argument, what if Civ5 shipped with TONS OF BUGS. Its not worth our money! But then someone will say it will be fixed through patching. Or better yet, who is to say its going to be shipped with a ton of bugs. Yes we can point to Civ4 having tons of things that needed fixing, but can you say that will be true for every new game released out there ever? The fact that we expect new games to not have bugs means that we generally expect no bugs, and don't assume bugs will be present in these games. Anyways, back to the point: If you waste your time creating a mod that nobody plays, its probably "not the best ever". If the mod somehow cant work because its not compatible with the game's DLC, its probably not finished yet. If DLC prevents mods from working, then that's something that needs to be patched. Let's look at Civ4. There are tons of mods that work right now. Why would it be any different? Why would DLC be any different from expansions in a code form of view? It adds something to the game. Mods choose to utilize it or not. Mods that do utilize the DLC will require the DLC. Mods that do not, don't. DLC's generally won't add large complexity additions to the game like Espionage or Religions. Leave that to expansions, which generally overhaul the game and will be incorporated into modding.
This is an extension of my previous point: frequent releases of DLC imposes additional burden on the modders to maintain compatibility. It's like having a weekly patch for the game, except that instead of fixing bugs, it adds new content that you have to be able to accommodate. Typically expansion packs and patches are infrequent enough that the mod-maker doesn't have to babysit his mod to keep it working; the introduction of DLC can easily change this.

We're told CiV is supposed to be somehow special and can work around this. Until there are more details on how mods are supposed to work, there's no telling how things will turn out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
I think Civ is lucky to still have such a modding system, if at least on paper for Civ5. Few games allow us PC players to mod it to what we want these days. You should look at this from a positive perspective rather than negative.
CiV is lucky to have a modding system that we have no details about, beyond the idea that it's supposed to be great? I wouldn't consider ourselves lucky until we've seen it in action, because it's all too easy for something to go wrong. I'm being realistic here, not pessimistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs View Post
Oh yeah, and don't forget: There is no confirmation that DLC is available for this game yet (the deluxe order edition doesn't count fyi).
If in-game content that isn't available unless you purchase and download it from a specific retailer isn't DLC, what is it?
isndl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 06:37 PM   #38
tom2050
Deity
 
tom2050's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,365
No one knows if DLC will even be made for free or for purchase ? I don't think they have said anything about that yet.

DLC for a game like Civilization 5 really doesn't make sense as others have stated. Civ is a heavily modded game, and Civ 5 is being quoted as having ultra-modding capabilities. No reason for it.

My problem with purchase DLC is the often high-prices for minimal content. You can almost feel yourself getting ripped off when you buy it. This is precisely what the Steam-Only 1 extra civ package is doing (although it is not DLC); they are charging high extra price for next-to-nothing.
tom2050 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 06, 2010, 11:02 PM   #39
Rusty Edge
Deity
 
Rusty Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cheeseland
Posts: 2,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by isndl View Post
I don't think anyone has a problem with the concept of DLC in and of itself. It's when the companies start charging additional fees for the DLC that it becomes a problem.
I have a problem with DLC at any price, if it occurs so frequently as to interfere with everyone being on the "same page", not only for modding purposes as you describe so well, but for multiplayer in it's various forms (PBEM, LAN, GOTM, succession games, etc. ), & for purposes of forum discussion, Polycast, Hall of Fame and what not. Some games can take a long time to play, and I thought the patches came too often once or twice in Civ IV. I would find it annoying, rather than fun if DLC were a monthly thing, or came at me like it does for my other Steam game, even if it were free.

I hope the plan is simply to give Firaxis a no cost DRM in exchange for providing Steam a larger audience for their advertisements. That the business model will remain a significant expansion every year or two. That patches will be free of cost.
__________________
Civ IV BTS /Huge/Marathon/Single Player/Mods
History in the Making ,Civ IV Road to War , Legends of Revolution , History of the Three Kingdoms , and Grand Inquisitions.
Rusty Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 07, 2010, 11:43 AM   #40
isndl
Chieftain
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Edge View Post
I have a problem with DLC at any price, if it occurs so frequently as to interfere with everyone being on the "same page", not only for modding purposes as you describe so well, but for multiplayer in it's various forms (PBEM, LAN, GOTM, succession games, etc. ), & for purposes of forum discussion, Polycast, Hall of Fame and what not. Some games can take a long time to play, and I thought the patches came too often once or twice in Civ IV. I would find it annoying, rather than fun if DLC were a monthly thing, or came at me like it does for my other Steam game, even if it were free.
DLC with no barrier to entry becomes no different than the various unofficial mods that the community creates - if you're in a position where you can update the mods you have installed, you can install the DLC as well. The modders have free reign over whether or not to use the DLC content, and if you can download a mod, you can download free DLC at the same time.

The problem you're having seems to be that you're not often in a position where you can update, because you're in long-running games. That's not strictly a problem with DLC; it's a problem with any mods you have installed that have updates available. I don't think it's fair to blame DLC alone for that.

Now if Firaxis/2K forces game updates when DLC is released, I can see there being a problem. The entire update policy in general for CiV is unclear at the moment, so there's a lot that could pose problems for you, not just DLC.
isndl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
civ5, civilization 5, digital deluxe edition, dlc, preorder dlc

Go Back Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions > Civilization 5 and DLC

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Advertisement

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is copyright © Civilization Fanatics' Center.
Support CFC: Amazon.com | Amazon UK | Amazon DE | Amazon CA | Amazon FR