Does this look familiar?

[Mahasona]

Posted in another game thread but hey...

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Can't say I agree, considering Civ6 DLCs aren't must-haves

 

[Ita Bear]

For Paradox games, definitely. And by the time you get the final DLC/ingredient, the burger bun has grown mould and needs replacing.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Can't say I agree, considering Civ6 DLCs aren't must-haves

Indeed. The vanilla version has always included the important core mechanics. This meme is cynical and hyperbolic in this context.

 

[Gorbles]

Different franchies and even different genres experiment with different monetisation models all the time. Does the industry skew (heavily) towards maximising profit? Yes. Are we still stuck in the 00s with yearly EA-published franchises dominating the console and PC space? Not anymore.

 

[Urlance Woolsbane]

Civ is really an odd franchise to level this criticism against, considering that it has quaintly retained its model of releasing two major expansions for every game for nigh on 3 decades. That the last two installments were also accompanied by a bevy of minor, fairly disposable DLC does not change the fact that what Firaxis' approach here is worlds away from that of Paradox (and I don't even hate Paradox's model).

That said, I won't be surprised if Civ VII uses the NFP as a blueprint for its expansions

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I will go on and extrapolate the Civ 6 monetization model per this meme:

Entree: vanilla

Extra toppings: First flight of DLCs

Drink: RNF

Side dish: GS

Dessert: NFP

Digestif: LP

 

[pokiehl]

Don't agree at all with the original post.

Nor do I think that developers and publishers are contemptible criminals for creating more content for their games and asking gamers to buy it if they want.

 

[tedhebert]

Don't agree at all with the original post.

Nor do I think that developers and publishers are contemptible criminals for creating more content for their games and asking gamers to buy it if they want.

While I agree with you, you’ve got to admit that EA and Paradox perfectly fit the bill for this meme…

Not Firaxis though, I find their model completely palatable…

 

[pokiehl]

While I agree with you, you’ve got to admit that EA and Paradox perfectly fit the bill for this meme…

Not Firaxis though, I find their model completely palatable…

Today, games actually cost less in nominal dollars than they did in the early 90s. I remember buying Chrono Trigger for the SNES for like $80, and Super Mario 64 for $65 or so.

Taking inflation into account, games today are even cheaper still! (In 2024 dollars, Chrono Trigger's original price was $165 or so.) Yet game development costs have easily gone up tenfold since that time period. Games cost more money than ever to make and obviously require even more man hours than ever before.

DLC, including cosmetic DLC, is one of the ways that developers need to make up the difference. Some companies can get ridiculous with DLC, but I don't really consider EA games or Paradox to be that level. I'm moreso talking about games with predatory microtransactions.

If companies didn't sell DLC, then we'd have a lot less actual content to play, and a full-priced game would cost literally hundreds of dollars rather than $50-$70. At least with the DLC scheme, you can pick and choose what you want to buy.

 

[Evie]

People have a grossly overinflated idea of how much of the DLC content is stuff that could have been added to the base game but wasn't. Even with most Paradox games, which seldom need the DLC to be playable or enjoyable (patching, yes, they do need that).

And *massive* rose glasses when looking at how much we really got in games in the past. A Paradox game today or Civ VI may "seem" to be missing features, but any of them is an incredibly more complex game, with, yes, more features than EU2 or Civ 2 were at release. Or EU III, or Civ IV *at release* for that matter.

To put it in burger terms, we've never stopped getting full burgers. If anything, we're getting fancier and nicer burgers. The problem is that one time we got a full trio with drink and fries, so now we complain that a burger meal is not complete if it doesn't include drink and fries. And one time we had a cheeseburger bacon, so now we complain any time we don't get cheese and bacon that it's not a proper burger. And once we have an appetizer before the burger, we'll also feel a burger without appetizer is an incomplete product, and so forth with the dessert, and the coffee, and the little mint candy at the end of the meal.

This - the fact that we expect every feature from past games and their expansions to be part of the new base game - is where the idea that we're getting shafted on content comes from. It's entitlement.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I'm more concerned about that I'm being forced to have a flavorless slice of Velvetta cheese in both scenarios and not some delicious blue cheese. I don't have hamburgers that often so I want it to taste as good as I can get.

 

[Evie]

Fancy cheeses is the kind of premium topping burger places, do, in fact, tend to charge extra for

 

[leif erikson]

People have a grossly overinflated idea of how much of the DLC content is stuff that could have been added to the base game but wasn't. Even with most Paradox games, which seldom need the DLC to be playable or enjoyable (patching, yes, they do need that).

Don't even want to think about what I have spent on Stellaris.

Do enjoy it though. So there is that.......

 

[InsidiousMage]

Even with most Paradox games, which seldom need the DLC to be playable or enjoyable.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. I gave Stellaris a try for a couple of hundred hours* and, while I did enjoy it enough buy the DLC when it was on sale, it didn't take that long to figure out that I actually need the DLC to get the "full experience." The fact that I was playing a "limited" version of the game did reduce my enjoyment of the game to varying degrees depending on what I realized what I was missing out on. Had a similar experience with CK3. I didn't get Tours and Tournaments and it became pretty obvious how limited the travel and activity systems were without the DLC. Not buying the DLC doesn't necessarily make the base game worse but its also pretty easy to notice that you aren't getting the full experience, which I find kind of obnoxious personally.


*Entirely weird thing to say even in context!

 

[Evie]

Unless I'm very wrong, and I'm pretty sure I'm not, travel and activity *wasn't even part of the base game at release*. It was designed entirely for the DLC, and part of it patched into the game for free at the time the DLC was released. As is Paradox tradition - a lot of features get split between patch and DLC.

So far from the vanilla game shipping with incomplete features, you're getting "lite" features added to the game for free. Which is...well, basically complaining because the restaurant gave you a free sample of fries and now want you to pay for the full serving.

I get how, for someone buying the game after the DLC has released, this may seem like the base game has unfinished features, because it's not obvious they're later additions but yeah,

 

[InsidiousMage]

So far from the vanilla game shipping with incomplete features, you're getting "lite" features added to the game for free. Which is...well, basically complaining because the restaurant gave you a free sample of fries and now want you to pay for the full serving.

I think this is the entirely wrong analogy because its not a "sample," its an incomplete game mechanic. Yes, travel and activities are new features added to the base game but only the bare minimum functions are added to the base game. Activities can have intents and different options to improve the activity but those require the DLC despite the options still being in the base game UI. Compare that to Civ6. If you don't have Gathering Storm the game will never mention power. Civ6 does not have obvious "DLC mechanic goes [here]" issues that Paradox games tend to have, especially the newer ones. That's what I mean when its obvious you aren't getting the "full experience." Its fine to have DLC add new mechanics but there are good ways to do it (Civ6) and less good ways (Paradox) where it becomes obvious a player is missing out. I first got Civ6 on the Switch and while it didn't take long for me to find out there was a bunch of additional content, I didn't find out because of a limited implementation of later mechanics.

 

[Evie]

You're still literally complaining about a feature that was added to the game for free well after release.

You're complaining because you ge the demo added to your base game to use in all your games, instead of having it be a separate minigame.

That does not an incomplete game make. It does, however, make a pretty textbook definition of entitled gamer.

 

[Sephi]

You're still literally complaining about a feature that was added to the game for free well after release.

You're complaining because you ge the demo added to your base game to use in all your games, instead of having it be a separate minigame.

That does not an incomplete game make. It does, however, make a pretty textbook definition of entitled gamer.

I think calling it a "demo" is a bit too much. It is a simpler and more streamlined version. Not everyone wants super complicated rules with 234327437 options and exceptions.

 

[InsidiousMage]

It does, however, make a pretty textbook definition of entitled gamer.

I'm not asking for free content, I'm asking that free content that is added to the game be more than a barely functional ad for some DLC.