2civ DLC pack is coming in december!

Abremms

Prince
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
436
So i was concerned that next Monday's mongol/babylon DLC releases would count as the 2civ DLC that i paid for as a bonus from D2D so i sent them an email asking if I had wasted my money on something everyone was getting for free, here's the response:

Hi [deleted],

The promo they are referring to is not your exclusive. That is a freebie for everyone. Your exclusive for preorder we are told will come out in December. I am guessing it is going to be pretty special as it is taking longer.

Feel free to contact me with any more questions you might have.

Sincerely,
[deleted] - Senior Manager, Customer Service

so we get 2 more civs in December! woo!

(please try to refrain from engaging in the "if they have time to make dlc why can't they fix the game?" argument. civ dlc are mostly art and don't take much programming time away from patches.)
 

Senethro

Overlord
Joined
Mar 18, 2007
Messages
5,727
Location
The cutest of cephalopods
Excellent, I was worried I had paid for what other people would be getting for free.

And I still might when they announce the expansion pack civs, but we'll see!
 

Louis XXIV

Le Roi Soleil
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
13,579
Location
Norfolk, VA
If Spain is a paying DLC I will murder a kitten.

Uh, what? It's pretty much a given that all future Civs will be DLC that they charge you for (the Mongols were the exception that proves the rule). Spain's also quite likely to be included at some point (even though it wasn't on of the original 18). So, please, leave the kitties alone :)
 

Tylerryan79

Emperor
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
1,091
Location
Boston, MA
Greg also confirmed this, but thE more sources the better! Thanks for taking the time to post this :).
 

Sock Bramson

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
96
Good post. This info did arise in the earlier thread about the Mongols, but it was buried in a pile of pointless complaints and paranoid Fireaxis bashing. Have a bit of faith, ye detractors; Fireaxis has not and will not abandon CiV. (until Civ 6 comes out, that is. :p)
 

Thander

Warlord
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
192
Good post. This info did arise in the earlier thread about the Mongols, but it was buried in a pile of pointless complaints and paranoid Fireaxis bashing. Have a bit of faith, ye detractors; Fireaxis has not and will not abandon CiV. (until Civ 6 comes out, that is. :p)

It's still disappointing considering we will all have to pay $5 every time a new civ comes out. An expansion pack for $40 (the high end) would have ~10 civs and new units, buildings, wonders, and possibly game mechanics. DLC is always a ripoff (with a few exceptions).
 

Louis XXIV

Le Roi Soleil
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
13,579
Location
Norfolk, VA
The difference is you can pick and choose. You don't have to get every Civ.
 

Fistalis

Prince
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
373
The difference is you can pick and choose. You don't have to get every Civ.

Ya with the side effect of killing multiplayer even more.(not that its in great condition now) People who dont have same DLCs won't be able to play together without turning them off/removing them/not using them depending on how they are implemented. People with babylon already have issues with normal copies.. now give us 30 diff dlc civs and see how multiplayer goes.. take longer to find people with the same dlcs than the game lasts...
 

Louis XXIV

Le Roi Soleil
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
13,579
Location
Norfolk, VA
Actually, they said they're looking for a solution that would not only allow DLC to be played with people with the same DLC, but possibly even include people without it. If it's the former, you can still figure out content in common and select only those civs. If it's the latter, there's obviously no restriction at all - that's better than any previous Civ expansion.
 

DalekDavros

Prince
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
303
I couldn't imagine D2D trying to foist the free one off as their promo, but it's good to hear it confirmed.

Based on the "Mogolia" sound file in the launch version, it's likely that Mongolia was intended to be there all along, but Firaxis had to cut it temporarily because they wanted to focus on the core gameplay more in the days leading up to launch.

An expansion pack for $40 (the high end) would have ~10 civs

No it wouldn't. A Civ IV expansion might have, since a new civ basically just meant a quick animation for a leader head, choosing two traits, and a quick animation for one unit.

Civ V has full motion 3D leaders, voice acting in languages with few-to-no living speakers, more art, and more thought going into the uniques.

Furthermore, the example of Babylon shows that a free knock-off version minus the artistic goodies will come out for free almost immediately, so any complaint about not caring about the visuals is null and void.

If you care about having well-crafted beautiful civilizations, you can buy them for less than the cost of a movie ticket. If not, you can get the generic version for free. Seems like win-win to me.
 

ElephantRider

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
90
Location
Texas
It's still disappointing considering we will all have to pay $5 every time a new civ comes out. An expansion pack for $40 (the high end) would have ~10 civs and new units, buildings, wonders, and possibly game mechanics. DLC is always a ripoff (with a few exceptions).

Thander speaks the truth.

The difference is you can pick and choose. You don't have to get every Civ.

The difference is you will still be paying at least $40 for the expansions. I don't really see them releasing things like Warlords or Beyond the Sword as cheap little DLC. People make the argument all the time about you don't have to get every civ. But they fail to realize that if there are expansions, they won't be any cheaper just because there's not as many extra civs included with them. It's a bad argument anyway. "You don't have to buy if you don't want it". That's not the point. The point is that if you bought Civ IV, Warlords and Beyond the Sword at release you paid at least $120. Imagine how much the complete version of Civ V is going to end up costing if each extra Civ costs $5.

And there's this...

Ya with the side effect of killing multiplayer even more.(not that its in great condition now) People who dont have same DLCs won't be able to play together without turning them off/removing them/not using them depending on how they are implemented. People with babylon already have issues with normal copies.. now give us 30 diff dlc civs and see how multiplayer goes.. take longer to find people with the same dlcs than the game lasts...

Imagine if all the things that came in expansions for Civ IV were split up into little DLC. It would make multiplayer and modding a nightmare.
 

Alsark

Noble
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
841
Location
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Based on the "Mogolia" sound file in the launch version, it's likely that Mongolia was intended to be there all along, but Firaxis had to cut it temporarily because they wanted to focus on the core gameplay more in the days leading up to launch.

My guess (when that file was found) was that they basically already had created Mongolia but took it out so that they could charge for it at a later time (they missed the sound file because it was misnamed, but they removed all of the other Mongolia files). I still think they intended to do that, but because of all of the negative reactions going around they decided to give it out for free. That way they give us something that was probably already in the game but removed for free as a form of damage control.

Just a possibility. I don't really care either way, as I don't have any time to play the game.
 

White Elk

99 > 1
Joined
Jan 9, 2002
Messages
2,126
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
...as cats are evil.

Cats protect us against the evils of the underworld.
;)
Spoiler :




The more I learn about Civ5, the less painful boycotting it has become. I'm happy for those who don't mind dropping $5 a civ and will enjoy the content; but I'd have had no part of it. Now whats gonna happen in the expansions? Will there be any interesting Civs left for them?
 

Morningcalm

Keeper of Records
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
4,116
Location
Abroad
What irks me is that the D2D customers get the first DLC for free, and Civ III and an exclusive map pack AND the Deluxe ed with babylon. People who preordered from Steam got only the Deluxe ed with Babylon. Yet D2D's was cheaper. I feel exploited.

I can just anticipate someone replying to me with one of these:
-Market forces
-"You should have waited and been a smart customer" to which I would reply, "Well I am to be punished for being an excitable Civ fan am I? Well I suppose Civ 5's being a disappointment was indeed a punishment of sorts." :(
-The DLC won't be that expensive. (How are you to know? And the issue isn't the amount of money per se, it's the inequality between the two purchases that really gets me).
 

Vordeo

King
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
719
Cats protect us against the evils of the underworld.
;)
Spoiler :

That's what they want you to think.

The more I learn about Civ5, the less painful boycotting it has become. I'm happy for those who don't mind dropping $5 a civ and will enjoy the content; but I'd have had no part of it. Now whats gonna happen in the expansions? Will there be any interesting Civs left for them?

Eh, I'd never heard of the Songhai, but they're certainly one of the more interesting civs in the game IMO. There's alot of world history to mine for good stuff.

All that said, if we do get something like a Spain/Maya 2 pack in December, I really hope they aren't going to price it at $10. I'd be willing to shell out $5-7 no problem. I'm not prepared to assume every civ will cost $5 just because of the Babylon precedent, as you could make the argument that they needed to charge a decent fee there to not piss off the deluxe buyers.

We'll see though.
 

Venereus

This Is Streamlined!
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,026
I am guessing it is going to be pretty special as it is taking longer.

I read the disclaimer in the OP, but that's disgusting.
 
Top Bottom