If Genghis Khan (Mongolia) was released as a DLC civ...

[Druin]

I personally find that "hardcore" gaming (that is, playing one game A LOT instead of buying every new title for your 360) is such a cheap hobby, I can pretty easily justify buying DLC consistently independent of cost.

Ex. If Mongolia was 10$ which is ~ the price of a movie ticket in my town (<3 cali) then all I have to do is play a single game of civ in which Mongolia makes the game feel "new" again and it has paid for itself.

If I were to buy new games often, this no longer holds because 10$ is 1/5 of a completely new game and thus not worth it ... but I don't ... civ 5 will be my last game purchase until Diablo III

I also feel it helps to think about 2k gaming as a corporation not as a group of people. Even if 2k was your best friend, they have people they are accountable to and when they make obvious choices that increase their profit and treat you like a consumer instead of a special friend it is because you are a consumer and they are a producer They aren't being "mean" they are being logical. IE: the "you would too if you were in their shoes" ideology!

 

[cccv]

^First of all, there probably isn't just one civ that everyone wants and a bunch they can do without. 5 new civs for 10 dollars=50 dollars=the price of the initial game. That doesn't strike you as a rip-off? Because it clearly is. The people who say "but that's only the price of a _____" need to think it through a bit more. I could go for a piece of licorice right now. Would I pay 10 dollars for it because it's "only the price of a ______"? No, that would be stupid. People should know a rip-off when they see one.

I really don't think 2K will be outrageous enough to charge 10 per civ, but if they did I'd like to hope people would have the sense not to pay it.

 

[Druin]

^First of all, there probably isn't just one civ that everyone wants and a bunch they can do without. 5 new civs for 10 dollars=50 dollars=the price of the initial game. That doesn't strike you as a rip-off? Because it clearly is. The people who say "but that's only the price of a _____" need to think it through a bit more. I could go for a piece of licorice right now. Would I pay 10 dollars for it because it's "only the price of a ______"? No, that would be stupid. People should know a rip-off when they see one.

I really don't think 2K will be outrageous enough to charge 10 per civ, but if they did I'd like to hope people would have the sense not to pay it.

Well, as far as price v. average consumer happiness, yes, it would be a ripoff. However, my personal utility has zero correlation with the world average and thus it is not a ripoff for me. The idea of sentimental value is a fantastic example here. There are many objects in my life that, while commercially of little value, are worth significant sums due to my attachment to them. (No civ is not one of them )

 

[Niptium]

I don't want the Mongols.

 

[Fookison]

Why pay for civs? I can see a full expansion filled with many new features, civs, etc. just like in the previous editions of CIV. But pay for each civ? NOT!

 

[Minmaster]

Why pay for civs? I can see a full expansion filled with many new features, civs, etc. just like in the previous editions of CIV. But pay for each civ? NOT!

pretty soon, we're going to have to pay for each unit types...

 

[PieceOfMind]

In an attempt to prevent the recent news biasing the poll result, I've just closed it.

 

[Ogrelord]

You should make a poll for every Civs. Everyone vote $0 and everyone gets all the DLC free!

 

[eoc]

Depressed on the present Civ5, I won't buy it.

 

[Vordeo]

$5 sounds like a pretty reasonable price to me. Others will disagree, but they've every right to charge that.

Very glad to hear the Mongols will be free, and while others will complain (they always do, really), free is free, and Genghis is awesome in general.

 

[blacksmit049]

yay! it's free. And I'm hoping for an expansion pack too which includes new contents and that is where CiV is lacking for my opinion.

 

[Thormodr]

If they included unique art for their "cities" (Really the Mongols never really built cities with a few notable exceptions. Perhaps they should have special artwork for some Mongol emcampments) and improvements then I could see them charging $5. If they just use the generic Asian city artwork that wouldn't be worth it in my opinion.

 

[cccv]

Wow, scary that 14 people would have actually paid more than 20 for it. God I hope they were being hyperbolic. Finding out that it'll be free must have been one of the best days of their lives.

 

[Louis XXIV]

It's how it works. Some people are willing to overpay, some companies would be willing to sell below the market value. The in-between point is what it's worth and all those people "gain" money (according to economists) related to the difference.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

I can't believe that 14 voted for 20 or more... For a DLC???? I'm almost sure that they are or insane or someone that is trying to back up 2k...

No other reasons... Now i understand some votes over the top in other polls, like A votes to the Civ V release...

There is one more option to be honest, they are simply joking to create confusion on the matter...

 

[Karlus]

Why pay for one civ? Never... zero... nada... 0...

 

[whomybuddy]

Genghis Khan- you can make a mod for this free. you won't have the old man voice saying how great your civ are in the loading screen though but I'm willing to suffer that for a free civ. Basically you would give this civ 5movement horse archer that can shoot and run afterward.

 

[PieceOfMind]

No other reasons... Now i understand some votes over the top in other polls, like A votes to the Civ V release...

Lol, and F votes. But that doesn't agree with your perspective.