A pure graphical DLC, will you buy?

[Victoria]

Fort Rouillé Monument

Looks largely like a normal monument, just round with a bit of iron at the bottom.

I voted no, I rarely zoom in
However I would pay double what I have paid already just to get rid of the cartoon leaders... and the incoming governors.

 

[Olleus]

I think they will also see plenty of threads complaining about the AI and UI...

It's not a dichotomy. Wanting nice art doesn't have to be at the expense of functional gameplay.

It isn't a complete dichotomy, true, but the two are still pulling on opposite end of the same thread. When Firaxis makes a game, they have a certain budget with which they want to make something that as many people as possible want to buy. If they believe that spending $X on gameplay will give them fewer extra sales than $X on graphics, then they'll go for the graphics.

If that's what you like (and many people in this thread seem to), then that's something you should be happy with.

I, on other hand, don't care and wouldn't even notice if they give african spearmen different sandals, so I very much hope that Firaxis doesn't go in that direction any more than it already has.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

For me, it would have to be one very comprehensive art package for a very low price. And they'd probably need to throw in some other features like a Wonder or additional city-states or something.

 

[Xur]

If units got flags like in civ4 and flags on buildings etc... so you could see that its another country, then I'd pay for that. Other than that, then I doubt it.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Now I'd totally go for overall terrain mods over graphics for individual units or buildings/districts. I might not pay for those either, but I think something like Blue Marble would have a much bigger effect (although I like the way the base game looks just fine).

 

[God of Kings]

I wonder how much would it cost to have deciduous woods?

 

[Olleus]

I think they will also see plenty of threads complaining about the AI and UI...

It's not a dichotomy. Wanting nice art doesn't have to be at the expense of functional gameplay.

Did you read the post you quoted? If not, I'll repeat the main point here.

It isn't a dichotomy, but if Firaxis thinks that the player base values nice art over nice mechanics/balance, that is what they will prioritise. In a world of finite resources, priorities are all there is.

The first post of this thread explicit states that the OP wants to tell Firaxis to put more resources on making unique art. I'd like to tell them that it is the very very lowest priority for me and - hopefully - a good number of other civfanatics.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I wonder how much would it cost to have deciduous woods?

That's what I'm saying . . . people want 35 fully different graphics sets for 35 civs but no mention of the terrain that you see EVERY SINGLE GAME ON EVERY TILE

 

[Ezumiyr]

I would definitly be interested by more varied districts, units, or even continental biomes (if I remember well, there were two sets of forests in Civ5 -imagine having one full set for each continent with their own forests, deserts etc).

But I would probably not buy DLCs just for that, except if they are available for 2€. Bundled with something else, why not. Alternatively I would buy a big graphical assets bundle with a lot of stuff (new looks for units, terrains, districts, customizable colours on the map etc) for something like 15-20€.

 

[Zaarin]

If it looked good and made different civs look more unique, in a heartbeat.

 

[WillowBrook]

Some variations in the terrain based on continent would be great. Not sure if I'd buy others.

 

[conorbebe]

Yes, but I'd be disappointed to be charged for it. This kind of thing should come packaged with the civilisation.

 

[JosephC]

Probably not. I usually only buy expansions and don't bother with most other DLC (like additional CIVs). Only thing that was different this time was I was able to buy Deluxe version for the price of regular version with a VIP voucher from Green man gaming.

 

[xxhe]

Typically I buy those graphics/music DLCs when they are on sale.

 

[KayAU]

Yes, I probably would. It would depend on price and contents, of course, but something which brought more variety and beauty to the map would be welcome. Not that it looks bad now.

 

[Mort_Q]

To be fair, I'd buy it so my game is "complete", not because I have any real interest in it. I voted no.

 

[Thormodr]

Yes, I would buy this. It would enhance the immersion for me.

I like the Paradox model. It’s completely optional but for those that value these things it’s reasonably priced.

I’d also buy any extra music DLCs.

 

[timmychompchomp]

Voted yes, but price point would be the key. It would need to stepped in flavor for individual civs.

 

[heinous_hat]

Hmm, à la carte Civilization art and music. No thanks.

While the game is in need of more diverse 2D and 3D artwork, as well as some ambient fill music, I don't want to see it fractured into dozens of pieces. Paradox did this, and I can't even look at the store page for EUIV or CKII anymore... it's a puzzle of nested content packs. You also have the price inflation that comes with marketing everything separately. With a game as broad as Civ, starting down that road would be troubling.

I'd rather see them expand the budget and spread the cost over the entire product line. Then, make art and music updates part of the regular cycle.

Also, I'd like to see more direct help given to the modding community regarding documentation, tools and technical support. The resulting increased quality in user content could be directly utilized in marketing the game.

 

[Cao Cao Mengde]

I would, so long as it's more fairly priced than Paradox's ridiculous DLC policy.