No More Expansion packs.

[SHaW1986]

Since we must use steam it might as well be taken full advantage of. instead of buying an expansion pack with a few set civs, buildings, and additions to the tech tree, why not put all these things out en masse where you can buy whichever ones you want effectively creating your own customized expansion pack.

 

[ElephantRider]

Nah. This would be turning the game into a purely DLC cash cow. I, and many others, would much rather buy everything in a couple of expansions rather than be nickel and dimed for every little piece of it in DLC. It would seriously cost way more to get everything as separate DLC than it would to just buy a couple expansions like the series has done in the past. Also, you have the whole multiplayer issue where everyone who wanted to play online would have to have all the same DLC. Coupled with that it turns into a modding issue when everyone doesn't have the same DLC.

I could see them selling civilizations as DLC, but even then it would suck because you would still have to buy a full expansion to get the game changes. The only way to keep multiplayer decent is to have everyone with all the same core files. And what happens when you don't buy a certain Leader's DLC but someone you're playing against online has it? Would you still be able to play that person or would you have to buy that DLC so that the files wold be in your game?

I really don't want to see Civ go down the charging you for every little extra thing DLC route. Not that I play a bunch of multiplayer, but it is in the game, and when you break everything up like that it breaks multiplayer. It also breaks modding.

 

[SHaW1986]

i guess youre right. but how does multiplayer between people who have and dont have babylon work, or does it?

 

[ElephantRider]

You know that's a good question. I'm guessing you can still use Babylon if other players don't have it. I mean, in theory your idea should work for Civilizations being DLC, but anything that changes gameplay I think would have to be an expansion. Judging from the way they had a bonus Civilization like that as a bonus, I tend to fear this might be the path they're taking.

I don't really mean to say your idea is bad. I just don't like all the DLC that companies are doing nowadays. I would rather pay more for the game with everything in it than to pay one price for the game and then pay so much extra for DLC, that usually comes after I've beaten the game already.

My thought is, when I was a little kid, back in the early 80s, you could pay anywhere from $40 to $80 for a new game. When the Playstation came out, Sony capped the game prices on the system at $40 or $50, I can't remember exactly. Everyone else just kind of had to follow suit. But my point there is, that since the early 80s inflation has pretty much tripled or quadrupled the price of everything from a gallon of milk to a new car. There's not much that's the same price as it was 20 years ago. Video games, if anything are cheaper, and you know it costs a lot more to produce a game today than it did then. If you think about it, based on inflation, a new video game should run between $100 and $150 easy, if not more. But since no one would pay that, they release a core game and then make that next $50 up in DLC. If you think about it, it's really our own actions that have spurred the DLC craze. I'm like a lot of people, I want the whole game when I buy it. But then I would also be willing to pay more for that up front.

The price of video games is just about the only thing that I can think of that inflation hasn't affected. Even a movie ticket costs about 3 or 4 times as much as it did in the early 80s, yet games, if anything, are the same price or cheaper.

 

[Vordeo]

In addition to all that, from the developer's perspective releasing things piecemeal doesn't make much sense, as there'll always be content that a lot of people won't be interested in, or willing to pay for.

Now bundle that with something desirable, like a new well known civ (Spain/Mongols), and they'll fork out for it.

Not saying it's a good or bad thing, but there you go. I wouldn't mind the option though, and I'd love to be able to buy the Babylon civ (didn't get the deluxe) for a bit extra.

 

[SHaW1986]

id love to have babylon myself.

 

[Mark Havel]

I'd way prefer to have to fork over 30 to 40 bucks to have a big and good extension adding its fair share of content rather buy it pieces by piece with a dozen of 5 to 10 $ DLC. Of course I understand the problem with inflating development costs and flat prices... But most of the DLC sold nowadays tends to be overpriced, poor and short content rather than interesting stuff.