DLCs once again not included in Steam sale

[mr_siika]

I think that if the base game is on sale, and the digital deluxe edition is on sale, at least the first few DLCs could be on sale as well. Who didn't buy the DLCs by now is surely not going to in the next few months because R&F brought us enough new civs...
I preordered without DLCs and I'm looking forward to completing my collection with the DLCs. But paying 5€ for a civ I'll play once or twice in my life seems a bit excessive. Half off and I'm in.

 

[criZp]

Did you not buy deluxe with the hope/assumption you'd simply be able to get the DLC in the near future cheaper?

I don't buy stuff I don't know what is. The deluxe wasn't even supposed to include the indonesia/khmer pack, but they included it anyway because people who bought deluxe was so mad about the content they got (just look at steam reviews)

 

[Xmonger]

So you were cautious and bought vanilla and not Deluxe, now are regretting it and it's Firaxis fault? Somehow they are pissing on you? What about those of us that took a risk and bought Deluxe, should Firaxis now take away the benefit we got for buying Deluxe and give it to you so you can have the best of whole worlds?

 

[kaspergm]

Did you not buy deluxe with the hope/assumption you'd simply be able to get the DLC in the near future cheaper?

No, like others above also, I did not buy the deluxe edition because the 20€ extra price seemed like a bad bargain because I guessed that at least one of the DLCs would include material I did not want to pay full price for. This proved accurate. Firaxis themselves acknowledged that the initial DE was a bad bargain by including two extra DLCs for free. If they sold the deluxe upgrade separately for 20€, I would have bought it without hesitation once the extra two DLCs were announced to be included.

It's been over a year since the first DLCs were released, yet they are not on sale, while the deluxe edition including all DLCs has been on 50 % sale. I have a hard time seeing that being particularly logical or fair to those of us who preordered the regular edition.

 

[Xmonger]

On V I made the mistake of trying to game the purchasing system, and ended up paying more then if I had just maxed out straight up from the beginning. I ended up with both Steam (for multiplayer) and Mac store (bought it early on sale), regretted that. Now I just pay full price as soon as it's available and max out (e.g. Digital Deluxe), cheaper in the long run and I spend more time playing rather than *****ing and worrying about it.

 

[historix69]

One of the conclusions would be :
Don't buy at release. Wait at least for the Deluxe to be on a 50% sale after 1 year.
(Actally 1 year is not that long if you consider all the other games in your steam library you want to play ...)

A fair pricing should be one of the priorities of a games publisher to keep customers. Do not only concentrate on maximizing profit.
Getting Civ 6 Deluxe for 40 $ and having to pay 38 $ for the separate DLCs just feels UNFAIR.

There should be a general standard for fair pricing.

 

[Karpius]

I bought the hard copy deluxe edition (anniversary edition?) and I not only got all the DLC up to the expansion, but some chincy coins and a neat little art book. Yeah it was a bit steep, but I PLAY CIV.

Chincy coins and an art book? I feel like I missed out on some swag. Is that edition still available? Cuz, yeah, I'm goofy for that sort of stuff.

I see no reason why the older DLCs should not have seen a reduction.

Its probably the standard business reason. If they don't need to reduce the price to move product, why would they? They are not in business to be nice guys. They are in the business to charge "whatever the market will bear".

 

[Karpius]

There should be a general standard for fair pricing.

Fair price is whatever the buyer is willing to pay and whatever the seller of the product is willing to accept.

Firaxis will lower the price when the market is ripe for it. If they are still getting those prices for the DLCs then they have no incentive to lower the price.

 

[historix69]

Fair price is whatever the buyer is willing to pay and whatever the seller of the product is willing to accept.

I don't agree.
Humans (and many other animals) have an inherent sense for fairness and fair deals. If you have the feeling that a company demands unfair prices for a product, this will effect your longtime opinion for the company and you will probably be more cautious in the future when making a strategic decision like buying/preordering a game. It is easier to preorder when you have confidence that the company will offer fair deals in the future.

On one side the developers make all those efforts to really interest community in Civ 6, DLCs, Expansion with lots of youtube videos, etc. ... and on the other side they tell people : you bought Civ 6 standard on release so you will have to pay full price for all DLCs or you can buy the Deluxe Edition (in addition to your normal one) for 2 $ more.

Civ 6 Deluxe = Base Game + 20 Civs + 7 Civs (DLC) = 40 $
6 DLCs = 7 Civs (DLC) = 38 $
-> Math : Base Game + 20 Civs = 2 $

If the developers are really the nice guys from the community videos, then they should offer a fair pricing for their fans, independant from the fact if they bought the standard edition or the deluxe. For me Civ 6 is the game where the devs denied the option to buy a Season Pass to players who preordered/bought the normal game. And they did not correct this mistake in one and a half years.

I'm sure that there is a simple algorithm to generate psychological "fair" prices ...

Regarding the DLCs :
Actually the market is not willing to pay that much. Look at steam reviews :

Civ 6 : 69%
R&F : 62%
Australia : 39%
Khmer and Indonesia : 48%
Nubia : 37%
Persia & Macedonia : 34%
Poland : 30%
Vikings scenario : 9%

Based on those ratings they should have included all the DLCs for free in R&F and closed the DLC-chapter.

 

[bonafide11]

So the DLC civs aren't included in R&F? Or just the scenarios aren't? I bought the Deluxe because I knew I'd want all the civs, but just curious. I always assumed all the DLC civs would be included in the expansion.

 

[Gabhar]

So the DLC civs aren't included in R&F? Or just the scenarios aren't? I bought the Deluxe because I knew I'd want all the civs, but just curious. I always assumed all the DLC civs would be included in the expansion.

No, R&F only has the 9 leaders it introduces. No DLC civs or scenarios.

 

[Karpius]

On one side the developers make all those efforts to really interest community in Civ 6, DLCs, Expansion with lots of youtube videos, etc. ... and on the other side they tell people : you bought Civ 6 standard on release so you will have to pay full price for all DLCs or buy the Deluxe Edition (in addition to your normal one) for 2 $ more.

That is basic marketing. When the marketing model does not work and the company no longer is making a profit, they adjust the model accordingly (or try to). If the community refuses to endorse further products from Firaxis due to their pricing policies on 'additional content', then Firaxis will certainly make adjustments. If the community continues to purchase Firaxis products at whatever price point Firaxis sets, then Firaxis has *NO* incentive to change its policies.

If I make a widget and set the price at one dollar per unit and people buy them, should I lower the price because some people might claim the price is unfair? But if people stop buying my widgets because of the price, then I have to rethink the price and/or business model. If it gets to the point where people are unwilling to pay enough for my widgets for me to make a profit, then I am done making widgets. If people clamor for my widegts, then the price will go up because it can.

 

[Kwami]

No, R&F only has the 9 leaders it introduces. No DLC civs or scenarios.

And this is no different than it was in Civ V. With very few exceptions, expansions have never included DLC leaders. Nor should they! I don't like rebuying content.

 

[bonafide11]

And this is no different than it was in Civ V. With very few exceptions, expansions have never included DLC leaders. Nor should they! I don't like rebuying content.

I don't really care either way. But in Civ IV, if I remember correctly, Beyond the Sword included the civs from Warlords. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[historix69]

And this is no different than it was in Civ V. With very few exceptions, expansions have never included DLC leaders. Nor should they! I don't like rebuying content.

If they add the DLC-content for free in the expansion, you do not "rebuy" it. By buying the DLC before, you had the opportunity to use it before the Expansion.

It would really simplify the system if a new expansion would automatically include all DLCs so far (and any Deluxe Features). Now you already have 8 separate DLCs (including Azteks and R&F) to activate/deactivate.

 

[Wingednosering]

It's only 37 dollars or something to buy all the DLC. Considering the replay value you get out of them, I don't understand why people are whining about it. Paying ~37 dollars for DLC for a game that most of us put hundreds, if not thousands, of hours into is apparently the worst thing ever, but going and buying a game for 50 dollars that you play once or twice is just fine. I just don't see the logic in peoples complaints about DLC. This isn't some silly horse armor DLC, you actually get value for your money with the Civilization DLC.

Add 32 for R&F, which is more than the base game already. I agree that it's worth the money, if you can afford it, but speaking for myself, even $30 is out of my budget right now. Living in Toronto is freaking rough.

 

[Magil]

I don't really care either way. But in Civ IV, if I remember correctly, Beyond the Sword included the civs from Warlords. Maybe I'm wrong.

Actually I think it was the opposite. BtS included all the new features of Warlords, like Great Generals and vassal states, but not the new civ/leaders. That's how I recall it.

 

[UWHabs]

No, like others above also, I did not buy the deluxe edition because the 20€ extra price seemed like a bad bargain because I guessed that at least one of the DLCs would include material I did not want to pay full price for. This proved accurate. Firaxis themselves acknowledged that the initial DE was a bad bargain by including two extra DLCs for free. If they sold the deluxe upgrade separately for 20€, I would have bought it without hesitation once the extra two DLCs were announced to be included.

It's been over a year since the first DLCs were released, yet they are not on sale, while the deluxe edition including all DLCs has been on 50 % sale. I have a hard time seeing that being particularly logical or fair to those of us who preordered the regular edition.

Yep, if they had announced a 20$ "DD upgrade" package that included all 6 DLC that they came out with, I would have gladly jumped at that once I saw all the content that was actually going to be in it. Or even if they had announced in the pre-sale that the DD package would include 6 DLC and not 4, I would have accepted that probably 2 of them would be ones I didn't want, but that the others would probably make up for it.

I have gone ahead and bought a couple when other sites have had sales (got Khmer/Indonesia with the GMG 25% off sale before, and Australia when some other random site had it 75% off). At this point even 25% off might be enough to cave in and buy the rest, which would roughly bring it down to the original price I would have spent on the DD upgrade.

 

[historix69]

That is basic marketing. When the marketing model does not work and the company no longer is making a profit, they adjust the model accordingly (or try to). If the community refuses to endorse further products from Firaxis due to their pricing policies on 'additional content', then Firaxis will certainly make adjustments. If the community continues to purchase Firaxis products at whatever price point Firaxis sets, then Firaxis has *NO* incentive to change its policies.

If I make a widget and set the price at one dollar per unit and people buy them, should I lower the price because some people might claim the price is unfair? But if people stop buying my widgets because of the price, then I have to rethink the price and/or business model. If it gets to the point where people are unwilling to pay enough for my widgets for me to make a profit, then I am done making widgets. If people clamor for my widegts, then the price will go up because it can.

I've seen it with other games ...

Publisher offers a game for a high price. Players don't like the game (negative reviews) or don't buy the game (yet).
Publisher puts the game on sale shortly after release.
The game series is canceled, developer studio is now working on different games or is closed.

Forcing the players to boycott a company to point out unfair prices is not the best way in a dangerous market.

 

[True_Candyman]

I've seen it with other games ...

Publisher offers a game for a high price. Players don't like the game (negative reviews) or don't buy the game (yet).
Publisher puts the game on sale shortly after release.
The game series is canceled, developer studio is now working on different games or is closed.

Forcing the players to boycott a company to point out unfair prices is not the best way in a dangerous market.

If only that were the case for AAA titles. Looking at you Battlefront 2...

It just looks like Firaxis have been a bit more bullish now with their dlc model. I reckon they succumbed to steams demands for discounting on Civ V and ended up making a loss on it, and that’s why there was no further DLC on V after 1st xpac

Now they’ve learned, their hungry for our every penny, and won’t give us a fair price for their useless overdeveloped fluff unless we really wait for it.