[NFP] Pack1: Maya and Grand Colombia

[ShakaKhan]

Sorry, I'm kinda late to this party so maybe I'm missing something and will apologize if that's the case... But am I the only one a little perturbed about this whole pack 1-6 thing? Like it's bad enough that you could make the argument that the game with all it's components (expansion packs) comprise the entire product, and when we purchased it on release for full retail, we not only received an incomplete product, and then we have to pay additional amounts after years of waiting for all the expansion packs to receive the product that we already paid for? As if that wasn't bad enough, now you're going to subdivide one of the components that we already paid for into six sub-components, and presumably make us pay for each of them individually? And after waiting more? And you're going to do this during a time in which a pandemic is forcing massive layoffs all over the place? Seems shameful...

 

[blackcatatonic]

Sorry, I'm kinda late to this party so maybe I'm missing something and will apologize if that's the case... But am I the only one a little perturbed about this whole pack 1-6 thing? Like it's bad enough that you could make the argument that the game with all it's components (expansion packs) comprise the entire product, and when we purchased it on release for full retail, we not only received an incomplete product, and then we have to pay additional amounts after years of waiting for all the expansion packs to receive the product that we already paid for? As if that wasn't bad enough, now you're going to subdivide one of the components that we already paid for into six sub-components, and presumably make us pay for each of them individually? And after waiting more? And you're going to do this during a time in which a pandemic is forcing massive layoffs all over the place? Seems shameful...

I'm... confused.

Since when is it a new thing that a game is released (and a Civ game, no less, which has had always had expansions) and then further down the line, has expansion packs released? The base game, when it came out, was a complete product, but I would have thought it was obvious that they would still add to it as time went on and probably charge for that. I don't think they ever promised that if you bought it on release you would get all future content they chose to release.

But you seem to think that just because they've released expansions it proves that the game was 'incomplete' when it was first released, and they should have waited until everything they could possibly have dreamed of to include in the game was ready and only then released it, instead of following the widely accepted model where a game comes out and further down the line more content is added that you can buy or not as you see fit.

lolwut?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Sorry, I'm kinda late to this party so maybe I'm missing something and will apologize if that's the case... But am I the only one a little perturbed about this whole pack 1-6 thing? Like it's bad enough that you could make the argument that the game with all it's components (expansion packs) comprise the entire product, and when we purchased it on release for full retail, we not only received an incomplete product, and then we have to pay additional amounts after years of waiting for all the expansion packs to receive the product that we already paid for? As if that wasn't bad enough, now you're going to subdivide one of the components that we already paid for into six sub-components, and presumably make us pay for each of them individually? And after waiting more? And you're going to do this during a time in which a pandemic is forcing massive layoffs all over the place? Seems shameful...

I'm not following. The New Frontier Pass isn't for sale yet, not until Thursday at least when it launches. So I'm not sure what you have to pay in advance other than the base game to get the pass or the separate DLC?

 

[Karmah]

Well. I'm sorry but he has point. The whole one year pass basically amounts to an expansion. So if the pass cost the same price, it does feel like you are paying in advance for an incomplete product. Product here and in shakakhan being the expansion, not the whole game, mind you!
So at the end it comes to a question of pricing which has not been announced (or has it?).
With that being said. If those spread releases comes with balance patches all year long, then I'd gladly join the happy bandwagon. I've always wanted FX to really start moving things around with the meta. Not being afraid to make things 'OP/UP' in succession, forcing us to adapt over and over again instead of clinging to some old fantasy of balance that simply cannot come in such a game. Although yeah, they could start by cleaning a bit of the mess they made in the unit classes Adapting is good unless when it is to silliness.

 

[Haig]

I really like this approach, I get every month either a dlc with new content, or new patch and free content like map scripts and scenarios, which they said.

Also the fun of first looks, streams and speculations.

If there is a dlc one doesnt like, he can choose not to buy it. Also the new game modes being modular is brilliant.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well. I'm sorry but he has point. The whole one year pass basically amounts to an expansion. So if the pass cost the same price, it does feel like you are paying in advance for an incomplete product. Product here and in shakakhan being the expansion, not the whole game, mind you!
So at the end it comes to a question of pricing which has not been announced (or has it?).
With that being said. If those spread releases comes with balance patches all year long, then I'd gladly join the happy bandwagon. I've always wanted FX to really start moving things around with the meta. Not being afraid to make things 'OP/UP' in succession, forcing us to adapt over and over again instead of clinging to some old fantasy of balance that simply cannot come in such a game. Although yeah, they could start by cleaning a bit of the mess they made in the unit classes Adapting is good unless when it is to silliness.

It's $39.99 U.S. dollars for the full pass. If you choose to buy each DLC pack separately it will end up being a little more expensive than if you bought the whole thing. I believe it will be $9.99 for the ones with two leaders and $6.99 for the single Civ packs. I'm also under the assumption that you can even wait until March to pay for the pass when you know what you will be fully getting.
There does also seems to be a patch/update with each release every two months.

 

[Sostratus]

Also the new game modes being modular is brilliant.

It reminds me of Civ4’s options to enable Gods of Old or NextWar content in a regular game.
But since presumably they affect different systems, this time we can combine them.

I always liked that about Civ4. I pretty exclusively had one of the two enabled.

 

[Myomoto]

Well. I'm sorry but he has point. The whole one year pass basically amounts to an expansion. So if the pass cost the same price, it does feel like you are paying in advance for an incomplete product. Product here and in shakakhan being the expansion, not the whole game, mind you!
So at the end it comes to a question of pricing which has not been announced (or has it?).
With that being said. If those spread releases comes with balance patches all year long, then I'd gladly join the happy bandwagon. I've always wanted FX to really start moving things around with the meta. Not being afraid to make things 'OP/UP' in succession, forcing us to adapt over and over again instead of clinging to some old fantasy of balance that simply cannot come in such a game. Although yeah, they could start by cleaning a bit of the mess they made in the unit classes Adapting is good unless when it is to silliness.

You will have the option to buy all the DLCs as a bundle at the end of the release cycle. Nobody is forcing you to pay for unreleased content if you don't like.

 

[Josephias]

I might alter an screenshot just to get the feeling of what it could have been...because honestly the obvservatory clashes horribly with the blue standard campus buildings.

I'm thinking if it is still a preliminary version and they will re-skin a bit the standard buildings to fit with the observatory (as Ikanda in example re-skins the encampment buildings from white walls to orange-brown walls, might be the same case with the observatory, making all buildings fit with the brownish-red shade of the observatory stone, even if maintaining the blue roofs).


On the topic of the "subscription model"... well I am not worried at all, as Firaxis seems to care. I already tried it with the deluxe pass on release, and when the amount of DLC it included resulted lesser in price than the pass price, they added an additional one for free. On the other hand, it is a more risky model as a standard buyer, maybe, but as a game "supporter" or fanatic, makes sense: mainly you are paying in advance to ensure an additional year of support for the game (think "patronizing" it). Specially in these late stages, (game is 3-4 years old already), no company will be confident in the ROI of an additional development cycle, but in the other hand, must commit to deliver if you pay in advance. And mind it, you paid for what your paid: base game, R&F expansion, G&S expansion have all had a similar content and price to expansions of the past, and now we can add more. You were not promised these extra civilizations & system when buying these games, yet you decided to buy (or not) because you wanted the experience already.

On games I do not play that much, I may wait these three-four years and get a gold/platinum/XX pack if I want to save, but Civ is a game where I want to support as much development as possible and to keep having new things to play with, so I'll gladly pay in advance. May not be the case for you, but, the way market has evolved, if you want to get all the goods for a single price, you'll better get used to wait and resist the urge to play right now.

 

[FinalDoomsday]

You could treat it like an expansion and not buy until march when it's complete. Right now it's perhaps only reccomendable to civ fanatics who are pretty confident they will get enjoyment out of it regardless of what the later civs and modes are. As a somewhat jaded fan I'll be cautious, I want to get an idea of the overall quality of the new civs and modes.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

You could treat it like an expansion and not buy until march when it's complete. Right now it's perhaps only reccomendable to civ fanatics who are pretty confident they will get enjoyment out of it regardless of what the later civs and modes are. As a somewhat jaded fan I'll be cautious, I want to get an idea of the overall quality of the new civs and modes.

I'll also add that it's the only way to get the alternate Catherine and Teddy personas with their new abilities and agendas, if that also sounds interesting.
I was sold with the first three Civs being on my third expansion wish list.

 

[Kwami]

It's $39.99 U.S. dollars for the full pass. If you choose to buy each DLC pack separately it will end up being a little more expensive than if you bought the whole thing. I believe it will be $9.99 for the ones with two leaders and $6.99 for the single Civ packs. I'm also under the assumption that you can even wait until March to pay for the pass when you know what you will be fully getting.
There does also seems to be a patch/update with each release every two months.

And free patches every month in between releases, too, if the announcement video is to be believed. Twelve patches and six DLC packs!

 

[Foulweather]

Would the alternative be to wait until the whole thing (all 9 leaders) is done and polished next spring before they release it? Bah, let me play some leaders now if they’re finished and I’ll wait for the rest.

 

[ShakaKhan]

OK, I'll concede that my argument took an extremist view, but...

I'm... confused.

Since when is it a new thing that a game is released (and a Civ game, no less, which has had always had expansions) and then further down the line, has expansion packs released? The base game, when it came out, was a complete product, but I would have thought it was obvious that they would still add to it as time went on and probably charge for that. I don't think they ever promised that if you bought it on release you would get all future content they chose to release.

But you seem to think that just because they've released expansions it proves that the game was 'incomplete' when it was first released, and they should have waited until everything they could possibly have dreamed of to include in the game was ready and only then released it, instead of following the widely accepted model where a game comes out and further down the line more content is added that you can buy or not as you see fit.

lolwut?

... my concern is the way this is trending, Back in the 80's and 90's, you bought a game and you had this bulky cartridge that it was on, but that was it - you paid for the game and you had it in its entirety and could play it whenever you wanted, even decades later. Then in the later 90's to 2000's you bought a game, but later could ADD extra (extra or missing from the original product... debatable) content with an expansion, but had to pay more for it. And now they're proposing that you can get one of these expansions, but have to either A.) pay for multiple (6) components individually, which are (presumably) considerably less expensive than an expansion but collectively would add up to quite a bit more OR B.) wait until all components are released and buy a bundle pack, and I'm sure they'll find a way to penalize you if you don't spend the maximum or pay the most quickly...

I'll also add that it's the only way to get the alternate Catherine and Teddy personas with their new abilities and agendas, if that also sounds interesting.
I was sold with the first three Civs being on my third expansion wish list.

Ah, and there it is.
So to recap, as the years progressed, we've gone from first buying a game and having the whole game on purchase, to then buying the game and later being able to supposedly "add to it" by purchasing additional expansions, and now when purchasing one of these expansions, we buy it one "pack" at a time and spend more for it (to make sure they keep getting residuals from already-invested customers)... You guys are really cool with this trend? Well guess what! you're going to love the next step in the trend! It seems the next logical step is to allow for an expansion containing a single leader (who historically could be associated with two civilizations, one currently in the game and one not) as an alternate leader for a civilization (the one currently in the game.) Next, you can purchase an additional expansion pack with the leader's OTHER civilization (the civ not already in the game) and that civ ability will be incredibly potent (to get you to shell out the money for it.) And then you can buy another expansion with that new civ's unique unit... and spend more money for the next expansion with that civ's unique infrastructure...

six DLC packs!

that's the point - this should be 1 product, but they're gonna make you pay for each one, and collectively it will cost you more.

 

[Kwami]

OK, I'll concede that my argument took an extremist view, but...
... my concern is the way this is trending, Back in the 80's and 90's, you bought a game and you had this bulky cartridge that it was on, but that was it - you paid for the game and you had it in its entirety and could play it whenever you wanted, even decades later. Then in the later 90's to 2000's you bought a game, but later could ADD extra (extra or missing from the original product... debatable) content with an expansion, but had to pay more for it. And now they're proposing that you can get one of these expansions, but have to either A.) pay for multiple (6) components individually, which are (presumably) considerably less expensive than an expansion but collectively would add up to quite a bit more OR B.) wait until all components are released and buy a bundle pack, and I'm sure they'll find a way to penalize you if you don't spend the maximum or pay the most quickly...

Damn kids, get off my lawn!

Also, you're just making up nonsense. The pricing is already known. Purchasing the six packs separately will cost about $2 more than buying the pass and you'll miss out on the alternate costumes and abilities for Catherine and Teddy. If you wait until the final pack is released and buy the pass at the end, then you still save $2 and get the bonus content. So, you don't have to buy anything in advance. And, if you want to pick and choose, then you can do that, too. You'll miss out on the bonus content, but odds are that content becomes available for purchase later, anyway.

The cost of the season pass is $40, which is the cost of an expansion these days. You're getting the same number of civilizations and leaders than an expansion features, plus new world wonders, natural wonders, resources, city states, units, buildings, and game mechanics (modes). Also, they're promising an entire year or monthly patches. So, you'll definitely get an expansion's worth of content for the same price as an expansion, but with added flexibility since you don't have to buy everything and you can disable modes that you don't want to play.

Honestly, of all the terrible DLC and expansion policies out there these days, this one isn't so bad. It's much better than just about any others. Why all the complaining? Sure, I miss knowing that I own a complete game and that I can play it 30 years from now (assuming that the hardware still functions), but that ship sailed more than a decade ago and it's never coming back. It's just not. If you want to own games, then check out GOG. They let you download installers with no DRM and you can back them up and reinstall the games whenever you want, no Internet connection required. Otherwise, we're sort of just stuck with what we have. Let's at least not complain so much about the less bad systems.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

that's the point - this should be 1 product, but they're gonna make you pay for each one, and collectively it will cost you more.

Nobody is forcing you to pay for each one individually though. That's your own decision. Honestly if your that mad about it you should treat it like the other expansions and wait until March when everything is released to make up your own mind on if you want to purchase it in full or not.

And then you can buy another expansion with that new civ's unique unit... and spend more money for the next expansion with that civ's unique infrastructure...

They wouldn't do this. Firaxis knows that they would have to sell the UU with the Civ because no one would ever buy it separately.

 

[mitsho]

This isn‘t even a true season pass, as you can buy every component separately, if you want to. I expect civ7 then be in a monthly subscription model as i think the DLC doesnt work as well for them as they expected. It makes them design overpowered civs and they probably sell based on popularity: Nubia is just not all that whereas a downloadable Germany would probably sell very well (in Germany). Civs in general are not suited to DLC and expansion packs make everything complicated which is why i believe civ7 will have a rather radical innovation regarding civs and leaders.

but you are right, them splitting up the third expansion pack into 6 packs allows them to have a higher price - but i guess they need it. It is still one of the better options out there.

 

[blackcatatonic]

OK, I'll concede that my argument took an extremist view, but...
... my concern is the way this is trending, Back in the 80's and 90's, you bought a game and you had this bulky cartridge that it was on, but that was it - you paid for the game and you had it in its entirety and could play it whenever you wanted, even decades later. Then in the later 90's to 2000's you bought a game, but later could ADD extra (extra or missing from the original product... debatable) content with an expansion, but had to pay more for it. And now they're proposing that you can get one of these expansions, but have to either A.) pay for multiple (6) components individually, which are (presumably) considerably less expensive than an expansion but collectively would add up to quite a bit more OR B.) wait until all components are released and buy a bundle pack, and I'm sure they'll find a way to penalize you if you don't spend the maximum or pay the most quickly...
Ah, and there it is.
So to recap, as the years progressed, we've gone from first buying a game and having the whole game on purchase, to then buying the game and later being able to supposedly "add to it" by purchasing additional expansions, and now when purchasing one of these expansions, we buy it one "pack" at a time and spend more for it (to make sure they keep getting residuals from already-invested customers)... You guys are really cool with this trend? Well guess what! you're going to love the next step in the trend! It seems the next logical step is to allow for an expansion containing a single leader (who historically could be associated with two civilizations, one currently in the game and one not) as an alternate leader for a civilization (the one currently in the game.) Next, you can purchase an additional expansion pack with the leader's OTHER civilization (the civ not already in the game) and that civ ability will be incredibly potent (to get you to shell out the money for it.) And then you can buy another expansion with that new civ's unique unit... and spend more money for the next expansion with that civ's unique infrastructure...
that's the point - this should be 1 product, but they're gonna make you pay for each one, and collectively it will cost you more.

OK, now granted I have no idea how old you are, and I will refrain from presuming, but the thing is that in 2020 this comes off as 'back in my day...'

As Kwami says, that ship has long sailed. We have base games that come out and can be added to with later DLC now. This is just how it's done now and frankly I hope the idea of 'game comes out, is 100% complete monolithic entity that will never be updated outside of community efforts' is never coming back. As a gamer, I really enjoy games with frequent updates and DLC that gives me the opportunity to try new playstyles and extend the lifetime of a game. I bought Civ 6 back in 2016 when it was released. Would I have enjoyed the game even more if it had come out with 50+ Civs, loyalty, governors, eras and ages, diplomatic victory, the World Congress, disasters, climate change... quite possibly, yes (although equally all of that content might have been pretty overwhelming right at the start). Would I still be playing the game now, in 2020? Probably not as I'd have long ago burned through all the content.

The cost of buying the whole pass upfront is $39.99 which is a whopping two dollars less than buying the packs individually as they come out. It's hardly gouging. Now, if you want to talk about the price itself being too high, that's a whole other debate altogether (and personally I'm inclined to think it's a fair price when you consider the game modes and extra districts and Wonders that are being added as well as the Civs themselves).

 

[Casworon]

I think it's also worth noting that game development is much more expensive than it used to be. Teams are larger, budgets are larger. Everything is larger.

Also games are larger. Especially with the new long term support method we are now seeing. By your logic it used to take companies six months to a year to make a 'complete game', now it takes them 4-5 years if not longer if support continues.

They aren't just sat twiddling their thumbs during that time. Work is being done and stuff added to the game.

So much has changed and so fast in the gaming industry that there is very little to compare between how it is now and how it used to be. Its effectively two different species entirely.

I'm not saying the modern gaming industry is a particularly consumer friendly place, not at all. It's now entered the realms of big business big money etc, and as a general rule I follow is that whenever that happens there is often a large drop in quality. But it is extremely complicated (as most things in life are) and putting it down entirely to greed seems like an extreme oversimplification.

 

[Karmah]

You will have the option to buy all the DLCs as a bundle at the end of the release cycle. Nobody is forcing you to pay for unreleased content if you don't like.

As I said, I understand the argument that it is a bit weird. But if that means that the devs will be more reactive with one update each month then it is a really good thing at the end. They can fix issues introduced two months later leading to improvements each month , and that is a real gain.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I consider this approach as a rip off (because after such a long period of nothing a lot must be done already) but one I will accept and support if it kick-start a whole new process I've been asking for a long time.