(Post) Launch DLC schedule

[Kwami]

Good to see the commitment. But I hope for a season pass for the first year or whatever.

The Founders Edition of the game is basically a season pass.

 

[Siptah]

Good to see the commitment. But I hope for a season pass for the first year or whatever.

I guess they consider the founders edition the season pass (for the first half year). The "good news" is that the already packaged 2x7 DLC. I guess you will save some money with these collections compared to the individual DLCs. I'm actually surprised that there even are individual DLCs to buy from these packages.

 

[Nikolai II]

Yep. Definitely getting them all.

 

[AriochIV]

People like to see updates to the game after release, but they don't like to see content held back from the initial release so that more money can be charged for it.

It's a fine line between the two, but paid DLC released day one or within a month of release is pretty clearly over that line.

It's not the end of the world, but don't expect people to be happy about it.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Well if you're counting preorder bonuses as day one DLC, even then VII's steals the show including early access, two new civs, four new leaders, and cosmetics all as day one DLC with 16 other items being included for sale within a month of release as bonuses if you preorder even more expensive editions of the game.

again a drastic difference in scale

Babylon was not a Preorder bonus, that was separate DLC, included only as part of a more expensive, deluxe edition. Sound familiar? And that’s not even mentioning the release of the Spain/Inca pack some weeks later.

But did you notice that? The goalpost shifting?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well if you're counting preorder bonuses as day one DLC (i'll admit I forgot Babylon and the map pack no one plays were preorder bonuses) even then VII's steals the show including early access, two new civs, four new leaders, and cosmetics all as day one DLC with 16 other items being included for sale within a month of release as bonuses if you preorder even more expensive editions of the game.

again a drastic difference in scale

Every iteration has had a drastic difference in scale in terms of DLC. Civ 6 had two DLC passes after the final expansion. I'm not surprised Civ VII will have more content.

 

[Ordnael]

Well, I was already planning to wait for the Nintendo Switch 2 before considering pulling the trigger on CIV VII. Civ VI already warms my hand a bit too much for my liking, with Civ VII running on my OG Switch I guess I could boil an egg.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Babylon was not a Preorder bonus, that was separate DLC, included only as part of anymore expensive, deluxe edition. Sound familiar? And that’s not even mentioning the realize of the Spain/Inca pack soles weeks later.

But did you notice that? The goalpost shifting?

Yeah we're just splitting hairs here. Preorder bonus, Deluxe edition, Who cares.

We're talking about the difference between a single civ and a map pack almost no one played as day one preorder bonus/dlc and early access, two new civs, four new leaders, and cosmetics all as day one DLC with 16 other items being included for sale within a month of release as bonuses if you preorder even more expensive editions of the game.

The goal post can shift because the argument you've tried to start is ultimately pedantic. VII's DLC model is obviously and undeniably MORE egregiously greedy and incomprable in scale compared to V and even VI (which was the point being made in the post you decided to respond to) and pointing to Babylon in the Deluxe Edition of V isn't going to change that

 

[Siptah]

To be fair, how (and on what) people spend money has changed a lot in the past 15 years. And people changed as well (most of us at least). Why should civ and their strategy be an exception? I might have a low bar if I’m happy that there are at least no microtransactions and payed patches.

To me, Tears of the Kingdom felt like such an oddity in modern gaming, despite being used to games being released and treated that way for my first 20 years of playing (I event to a store on release day to buy a physical copy, slotting it into my switch, and had a happy 100 hours). As I said in another thread, I’m way more happy with a Paradox-like model for developing games.

 

[Giskler]

I am confused by the outrage shown by some people when the bang for your buck with Civ games has always been amazing. I have thousands of hours played in every game of the franchise and they are by far the cheapest games I have ever bought in terms of hours of entertainment. I'm thrilled by the DLC schedule and hope they will keep it up for years to come.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Yeah we're just splitting hairs here. Preorder bonus, Deluxe edition, Who cares.

We're talking about the difference between a single civ and a map pack almost no one played as day one preorder bonus/dlc and early access, two new civs, four new leaders, and cosmetics all as day one DLC with 16 other items being included for sale within a month of release as bonuses if you preorder even more expensive editions of the game.

The goal post can shift because the argument you've tried to start is ultimately pedantic. VII's DLC model is obviously and undeniably MORE egregiously greedy and incomprable in scale compared to V and even VI (which was the point being made in the post you decided to respond to) and pointing to Babylon in the Deluxe Edition of V isn't going to change that

If you claim Civ V didn’t do Day 1 DLC, and I tell you that they did, that is not pedantry. That is a correction. You were wrong, and not arguing in good faith.

 

[AriochIV]

I am confused by the outrage shown by some people when the bang for your buck with Civ games has always been amazing. I have thousands of hours played in every game of the franchise and they are by far the cheapest games I have ever bought in terms of hours of entertainment. I'm thrilled by the DLC schedule and hope they will keep it up for years to come.

People don't like the feeling of being nickled and dimed, even when it's only nickels and dimes.

 

[pokiehl]

People don't like the feeling of being nickled and dimed, even when it's only nickels and dimes.

How is selling optional DLC, the same way they’ve done since Civ 5, nickel and diming anyone?

By the way, the same exact conversations were had here about Civ 5. Standalone DLC really upset people, storefront exclusive bonuses upset people, Steam itself really upset people. Funny.

 

[Giskler]

People don't like the feeling of being nickled and dimed, even when it's only nickels and dimes.

So the argument is that because people like being irrational Firaxis should change their business model? They have the least predatory DLC that I've personally experienced. It's not like they are charging $5 for some horse armor or selling influence packs or Army Commander XP boosts.

 

[moysturfurmer]

It's not like they are charging $5 for some horse armor or selling influence packs or Army Commander XP boosts.

Lol I mean, to be fair they’re selling cosmetic DLC like Deluxe Tile Skins. Which, you know what? I’m more than fine with. Not the kind of thing I would buy, but it’s another avenue for revenue that would help support the game long term.

You guys wanna see predatory DLC? Take a look at Ubisoft. Spend real money on XP boosts and Upgrade Resource packages. In a singleplayer game. Palace skins for multiplayer is nowhere near the same as that. Some people here need to get a grip.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

How is selling optional DLC, the same way they’ve done since Civ 5, nickel and diming anyone?

By the way, the same exact conversations were had here about Civ 5. Standalone DLC really upset people, storefront exclusive bonuses upset people, Steam itself really upset people. Funny.

Because it's obviously not the Civ 4 model, which seems to sit on the highest pedestal.

That's just a guess, but the gaming world is different than the early 2000s, no matter how much people will complain. Now it's expected for games to have passes or small DLCs.

 

[TheGrayFox]

If you claim Civ V didn’t do Day 1 DLC, and I tell you that they did, that is not pedantry. That is a correction. You were wrong, and not arguing in good faith.

It largely is pedantic when the original comment you were responding to was about the sheer amount of day one and planned DLC for VII and not specifically the existence of day one DLC alone.

i'll admit you were right and I was wrong though, congrats. there was two piece of day 1 dlc (one of which almost no one actually cared about) as preorder bonuses of Civ V compared to the 16 seperate planned pieces of DLC and preorder bonuses all scheduled to release within a month of VII's release. Now let's move on

 

[moysturfurmer]

It largely is pedantic when the original comment you were responding to was about the sheer amount of day one and planned DLC for VII and not specifically the existence of day one DLC alone.

i'll admit you were right though, congrats. there was two piece of day 1 dlc (one of which almost no one actually cared about) as preorder bonuses of Civ V compared to the 16 seperate planned pieces of DLC and preorder bonuses all scheduled to release within a month of VII's release. Are you satisfied?

What’s with the attitude chief? If you’re going to misrepresent facts (let’s say lie for brevity’s sake) to support an argument you’re making, then it’s incumbent on anyone involved to make sure the actual facts are represented correctly.

Fact is, this is nothing new. Did earlier civ games have Cosmetic DLC for Fog of War tiles? No, sure. But is it predatory of the devs to offer that as an option? No. This isn’t Diablo, this isn’t Assassin’s Creed. You’re tilting at windmills when there are actual dragons elsewhere.

 

[Zaarin]

Moderator Action: Please keep the discussion civil and about the topic, not other posters.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Lol I mean, to be fair they’re selling cosmetic DLC like Deluxe Tile Skins. Which, you know what? I’m more than fine with. Not the kind of thing I would buy, but it’s another avenue for revenue that would help support the game long term.

You guys wanna see predatory DLC? Take a look at Ubisoft. Spend real money on XP boosts and Upgrade Resource packages. In a singleplayer game. Palace skins for multiplayer is nowhere near the same as that. Some people here need to get a grip.

To comment from another game contemporary with Civ VI, though:

Anno 1800 is a trade/production/city building game which has, over the years, produced two basic kinds of post-release products:

Seasonal DLCs, which are Massive additions to the game: new regions full of lands to settle, different raw materials, narrative sub-games, production and population types - they change the basic game in fundamental ways.

Cosmetic 'DLC's which are much smaller and easier to produce (they are releasing 3 this year alone) and average about $5 each. These do not change the play of the game at all, but strictly the look of the game: they are 'skins' for buildings, ships, and other items, usually themed like a Steampunk pack, an Eldritch (Halloween/Lovecraft) pack, a Pirate pack, an Old Town (left over Medieval buildings in the towns) pack, etc.

The point is, BlueByte, the Ubisoft subsidiary that produces the Anno series, Knows Their Gaming Audience.

There are players who want to build the biggest, most incredibly complex web of trade and production to support massive cities of millions of inhabitants and who will buy every DLC that provides more regions and room to support those and more Production possibilities to increase populations.

Then there are the "Beauty Builders" who want to produce cities that are as complex and well-supported, but the basis is on How They Look: reproducing the look of 19th century European, American, or 'colonial' cities with an artistic vision that, frankly, I am in awe of.

Point being, these are two very different populations of gamers, and their releases over the years are designed to appeal to both of them and increase the appeal of the game to both of them.

I suggest that just possibly (Probably) Firaxis also Knows Their Audience/Market and has a pretty good idea what the majority of the various Civ Gamer types want and are willing to pay for.

And that majority may or may not be in agreement with what this tiny fraction of the gaming market on these Forums want or are interested in.

Get used to it.