Expansion on the horizon?

[Ita Bear]

Hello folks,

I don't want to say the game is slowly becoming stale, but... even Civ IV released its expansions quicker than this in the days before DLC polluted the world. Can anyone dangle a carrot? Is something, anything coming soon?

You have customers willing to throw money at this game; use them! There's not many other games to throw money at these days.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear

 

[Fimbulvetr]

There are always more DLCs coming. (This will be true until the game is abandoned, and you'll notice when that happens: no more updates)
Infos about new DLC will be available when it's released.

 

[Solver]

Civ4 expansion release schedule is probably not the best point of comparison. Warlords was released some 9 months after Civ4 and BtS was released another year later. So it's not like Civ4 had a flurry of releases.

There's more stuff for Old World coming and I think it won't be long until you hear some details. But we're genuinely interested in making a good game, really. We probably could have released another 3 or 4 DLCs by now with low quality but what's the point? We can make much better DLC by first observing the community to see what players find interesting and then actually make those DLCs well so we release something that actually adds to the game.

 

[Ita Bear]

Civ4 expansion release schedule is probably not the best point of comparison. Warlords was released some 9 months after Civ4 and BtS was released another year later. So it's not like Civ4 had a flurry of releases.

There's more stuff for Old World coming and I think it won't be long until you hear some details. But we're genuinely interested in making a good game, really. We probably could have released another 3 or 4 DLCs by now with low quality but what's the point? We can make much better DLC by first observing the community to see what players find interesting and then actually make those DLCs well so we release something that actually adds to the game.

It's not the amount of releases, but the content. Civ IV's expansions were meaningful, adding new civilisations, mechanics and ways to play. Old World's additional content, while cool, boil down to an extra series of campaigns and an event pack with clerics.

I remain hopeful, I'd really like the content to be a bit meatier and impact the main game, not just additional campaigns. I look forward to the announcement.

 

[Solver]

While Civ4 BtS was excellent and added lots of new stuff, I think you've giving Warlords a bit too much credit, it was mostly a civ/leader pack and didn't add much in the way of mechanics. The main mechanical addition in Warlords, if I remember correctly, was the vassal state mechanic which wasn't a good one.

The two OW DLCs so far are smaller in scope than full expansions (to the degree that expansions still exist) but you're overlooking that the first DLC also had a new nation.

Another interesting aspect with mechanics expansions/DLCs is that it's harder to do those when the base game is already a complete design. Then if you add new mechanics, they can feel tacked on as the product was already a complete one without them. Old World is I think one of those games, there are definitely mechanics that can be given more depths via event packs and such (like religion with Sacred and Profane) but it's a complete game so it's especially challenging to add new mechanics that would play well with everything that's in. In any case, stay tuned to what we have coming!

 

[Ita Bear]

I think you're underselling Warlords a bit, it did a lot more than just introduce the vassal state mechanic (which wasn't the best, I agree). It added six new civs as well as new leaders for exisiting civilisations, introduced new traits, new wonders, some new generic units and extra world wonders, it gave every civ its own unique building and added great generals, alongside quite a few additional scenarios to play through. The Hatti were a free addition to the game, not paid DLC, which is why I didn't mention them.

Old World is indeed a complete package but some areas are stretching the definition of 'complete' in that the mechanics are barebones at best. Think trade and diplomacy and government. Trade between nations outside of luxury goods is virtually non-existent, there is a complete lack of vassal/client states and other diplomatic options and there were other government types in Antiquity than kingdoms - republics, empires, tribal confederations. This is the type of content I hope to see addressed in future.

 

[Solver]

The Hatti were a paid DLC, but you were probably one of the early buyers to get that DLC for free.

Old World is indeed a complete package but some areas are stretching the definition of 'complete' in that the mechanics are barebones at best. Think trade and diplomacy and government. Trade between nations outside of luxury goods is virtually non-existent, there is a complete lack of vassal/client states and other diplomatic options and there were other government types in Antiquity than kingdoms - republics, empires, tribal confederations. This is the type of content I hope to see addressed in future.

So this is not in any way a statement on future DLCs, but the things you mention are exactly the kind of thing I don't expect to change much. Taking trade, it's not a simple mechanic that was intentionally left for DLCs, it's just a mechanic that is intentionally simple and different from Civ. If Civ4 had the diplomacy trade table, Old World's design emphasizes that leading a kingdom involved a lot of happenstance. Civ-style trade fits Civ, where you're a godlike leader with more control than any historical person ever had. Old World's trade is opportunistic, an opportunity to trade presents itself, maybe you take that deal, maybe you don't, but you don't have control over the finest details.

With governments, it's an example of working with a cornerstone of the design. Old World is very much built around having monarchies, the game had an even heavier emphasis on dynastic mechanics earlier in the design. Now say you want to add a republic government... it's a good idea that I would also be interested in, but just adding a republic on top of the game would be a tacked-on mechanic that's actually poor in implementation. Suddenly there's a good 2000 events that no longer make sense if you're a republic, hereditary legitimacy makes no sense, family trees and child tutoring need a complete rethink and more. Not saying we would or wouldn't consider such a mechanic but in my opinion the design effort to properly do other governments would be massive, and I'm personally not so interested in just having an additional mechanic that interacts poorly with the rest of the game (hello Warlords vassal states).

 

[Ita Bear]

My mistake regarding Hatti; I didn't realise they came with Heroes of the Aegean!

I see, I appreciate the insight and thought process. I remain very eager to see what you have in store in any case. Please hurry up.

 

[Dale]

Yeah Solver, hurry up.

 

[Stringer1313]

i mean honestly i just want 1000000000000000000000000 more events thx

(ideally civ- gender- age- religion- ideology- etc.- specific ones)

 

[PiR]

i mean honestly i just want 1000000000000000000000000 more events thx

(ideally civ- gender- age- religion- ideology- etc.- specific ones)

Do you think this would have success as a paid content?
Or is it more the "community job" through mods?

 

[Solver]

Probably both!

We've had success with Sacred and Profane, where most of the content is in events, and the event system is also made in such a way that it's very open for modders, you can write new events and they will play along with existing events just fine. So it would definitely be most interesting to see community event packs.

 

[Stringer1313]

Do you think this would have success as a paid content?
Or is it more the "community job" through mods?

It would have success with me for sure, but I don't know if I'm in the minority. I am a purist and don't like using mods. What % of gamers are like that?