The Perils of the DLC Content Drip Sales Strategy

[Emotional Husky]

I'm curious to know how people feel about the DLC content drip strategy approach that Firaxis has taken over the years and how it might affect people's views of the upcoming CIV 7. I've picked up on a vibe that a trend has emerged whereby the games are becoming thinner and thinner at launch and more robust only with DLCs to the point where it only becomes a real game years on when the cost of the game has doubled. Do you folks feel this is corporate greed rearing its ugly head, or just the cost of modern gaming?

At the risk of setting this up as shameless self-promotion, I did make a video about this subject which, if you have any interest in supporting CIV content creators, I hope you will all check out. But let me know either way how the sales strategy makes you feel about the game.

Link is here:

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Oh boy, this is going to be fun...

To be brief, I don't always love it, but I don't see any reason to be needlessly cynical about it. The launch game of Civ VII will have a lot of content.

 

[AD1730]

I have a lot of Paradox games, and I absolutely hate it. It fractures the player base because there are so many DLCs with so many different sets of features and content that very few players end up having all of them. It's one thing if each of these DLCs are a good value that people aren't going to get sticker shock (i.e. $10), but so many of these DLC get rolled out at $30+ that people get more selective, particularly when it doesn't feel like the added content is a good value.

I've never had much issue with Firaxis' DLC in the past. I've nearly always felt that what I received was a good value for what I paid. That certainly hasn't always been the case with the Paradox model.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm not sure the base game has become thinner. Yes, it doesn't have the same features as the fully released version of the previous iteration, but typically they have the same or more than the previous iterations base model.

Also, if they were to release a "complete Civ game" instead of base game with DLC added piecemeal, it would cost more than you would want to pay up front, and releases wouldn't get any closer together. You'd get Civ 6 Complete and a decade later get Civ 7 Complete, and each one would cost over US$150.

The idea that they develop the whole thing at once then break pieces off to sell separately as DLC is a cynical fantasy.

Now, what I do have a quibble with is them adding in fluffy no-value content like cosmetics to a DLC and acting like it should appraise higher for it.

 

[Kwami]

The DLC model for Civ VII isn't substantially different from the DLC model for V and VI. They're releasing a number of civ/leader DLCs over the next year, but they aren't promising new game mechanics and systems. So, there's no risk of fragmentation. The only differences are that you can buy the DLC in a pack and that the pack also has some extra cosmetics included.

I expect Civ VII to eventually have expansion packs with new game mechanics. Same as before.

 

[bbbt]

I don't actually find this the case with civ at all tbh.

Civ 6 launched very feature complete, in terms of having most of the major game mechanics. Diplomacy/diplomatic victory was the only major thing missing at launch. It looks like 7 will be the same.

Most of the additional DLC was essentially 'nice to have' - civs, leaders, all the game modes. Frankly, most of the extra game mechanics added in the two expansions were pretty extraneous and didn't change the game much, and I could leave most of them.

I found it sort of disappointing tbh. I mean I'm glad the games are launching fairly feature complete, but I'm not really expecting much from the future Civ 7 dlc besides leaders/civs.

 

[thecrazyscot]

From the PC Gamer UK article on Civ7:

There’s always room to add more leaders and civs – Civ VI has been absolutely stuffed with them over its eight years – but with religion and natural disasters and more already in Civ VII at launch, I have to wonder how Firaxis plans to expand it with its usual DLC. Beach wouldn’t say, of course, but he says that the team is "looking at new approaches for how to do big drops of content like expansions".

"I think what you have identified is correct, that this game is pretty darn complete right here at launch," he says. "It has a density of systems in it that approaches – probably not Civ VI with all the expansions and all the extra Leader Passes and everything else, just because it doesn’t have as many civs and leaders – but in terms of game systems, it's already quite robust."

I think there's a real argument that Civ7 is not "thinner at launch" than any previous iteration, and it looks like that's the an opinion shared by the devs as well. From all the previews I'm inclined to agree with them. To me it seems they are satisfied with amount of content in the "vanilla" release and are just thinking about how best to approach the DLC train. We already know that "more variety" DLC is coming, but how they choose to do "all new stuff" is pure speculation, and they're clearly not settled on it either.

 

[JNR13]

We got more civs with more uniques, more generic buildings, more unit tiers, more visual building variety than ever before. We got an additional terrain, terrain-based variety in features, a tie for the most leaders ever on release as well as generic unit count. We are now at *three* progression trees (tech, civic, attributes) on top of religion returning. Ideologies are back on top of governments.

The only place where I can see a cutback is in map scripts and such. As for everything else, I struggle to see where the game was thinned. It's silly to call this "not a real game". Or maybe I'm just too old to deny myself fun for some performative outrage ritual.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Honestly I have less of a problem with the DLC model than I do its pricing.

Base game is 70 and the founders edition which is esentially just a season pass for a couple packs of new civs and leaders (which doesn't include traditional expansion) almost doubles that price. That's wild to me.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Honestly I have less of a problem with the DLC model than I do its pricing.

Base game is 70 and the founders edition which is esentially just a season pass for a couple packs of new civs and leaders (which doesn't include traditional expansion) almost doubles that price. That's wild to me.

I don't like that there are different editions at all, to be honest. I understand why companies do it, but I've never been a fan.

 

[Captain Lime]

We got more civs with more uniques, more generic buildings, more unit tiers, more visual building variety than ever before. We got an additional terrain, terrain-based variety in features, a tie for the most leaders ever on release as well as generic unit count. We are now at *three* progression trees (tech, civic, attributes) on top of religion returning. Ideologies are back on top of governments.

The only place where I can see a cutback is in map scripts and such. As for everything else, I struggle to see where the game was thinned. It's silly to call this "not a real game". Or maybe I'm just too old to deny myself fun for some performative outrage ritual.

Religion is also pretty pared down at release this time. Other than that, I agree with you. Civ 7 seems to be pretty feature complete, though there are some features I really wish weren't included.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Honestly I have less of a problem with the DLC model than I do its pricing.

Base game is 70 and the founders edition which is esentially just a season pass for a couple packs of new civs and leaders (which doesn't include traditional expansion) almost doubles that price. That's wild to me.

I'm glad I held off on buying because I ended up with some Steam wallet funds due to gift cards. Definitely will make it feel less steep.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm glad I held off on buying because I ended up with some Steam wallet funds due to gift cards. Definitely will make it feel less steep.

Yeah, same. I was waiting to see what Santa would bring me, and he did not disappoint.

 

[Zaarin]

Religion is also pretty pared down at release this time.

To me it feels like basically the same dubious system we had in Civ6 except that now everyone gets one (which makes an iffy design worse to me). I was hoping for a fresh look at religion, but I'm hoping this at least means it's something that will be revised in the future. (And by revised I mean completely overhauled.) Given that Ed introduced essentially this iteration of religion in Civ5 and has left it virtually unchanged since does not give me hope, though; I'm going to take a wild guess he sees it as "good enough."

 

[Kwami]

Religion is also pretty pared down at release this time. Other than that, I agree with you. Civ 7 seems to be pretty feature complete, though there are some features I really wish weren't included.

I think some of the tedium was removed from religious gameplay. The beliefs and religious spread are still there. Those are the important bits.

 

[thecrazyscot]

To me it feels like basically the same dubious system we had in Civ6 except that now everyone gets one (which makes an iffy design worse to me). I was hoping for a fresh look at religion, but I'm hoping this at least means it's something that will be revised in the future. (And by revised I mean completely overhauled.) Given that Ed introduced essentially this iteration of religion in Civ5 and has left it virtually unchanged since does not give me hope, though; I'm going to take a wild guess he sees it as "good enough."

Well it is true that religious innovation is usually viewed as heretical, so maybe he's just trying to avoid the inquisition

 

[Zaarin]

I think some of the tedium was removed from religious gameplay.

Apostles and religious combat are gone (good), but keeping your cities following your own religion looks like it will still be needlessly tedious.

Well it is true that religious innovation is usually viewed as heretical, so maybe he's just trying to avoid the inquisition

laughs in Protestant

 

[Captain Lime]

I was meaning more that we're losing some aspects of religious victory as well, religious buildings are no longer part of the customization (two pretty weak points in VI, admittedly), and most importantly religion seems to now have the ultimate end goal of obtaining as many relics as possible. Sort of odd for religions depicted IRL as iconoclastic, but I'm not religious scholar either.

As an aside, I can't help but read all of Zaarin's posts in Doctor Bashir's voice.

 

[Gori the Grey]

so maybe he's just trying to avoid the inquisition

Obligatory: you think he expects that?

I'm resigned to the model. I like full expansions. Smaller releases, like a leader or two, I can initially take a pass on and not feel I'm missing anything important. I like being able at some point to be able to pick up at a discount all the little DLCs I may have passed on, so that I can own the complete game eventually. For the Deity Challenges in Civ V, one needed to have the exact game that all other players had, the last official release. I can go without one or two civs for forever and not feel I'm missing anything, until the time comes where I need the complete game for other purposes like that.

I don't think Civ VII looks "thin." If anything, it looks more complex than Civ V (which is the last I played), like it would take me a long time to acquaint myself with and master all of its mechanics. Civ V had a UA and two UUs. Now I have to intersect the leader's abilities with the civ's; and do that thrice over. And there are more uniques making up each one: unique quarters, unique wonders. My leader can grow, and I need to choose the path down which to do so.

One other thought I have about the release strategy is that, all along the way, they're also fixing bugs and rebalancing. They're able to do that because they have the programmers on staff developing the upcoming DLCs. As opposed to a one-time drop, take it or leave it with all its flaws (or a perfunctory bug fix after launch), I'll take the method they presently use.

 

[chaosprophet]

I don't see the releases, at least for civ, being thinner than previously. In general a problem tend to be people comparing a new release with a previous game after it had years of DC content released and not to how the game launched. Especially in series like Paradox one that has tons and tons of expansions and other DLC. I bet people may feel something similar to Anno 117 when it launches, even if it comes with tons of stuff, if they compare to the huge amount of content Anno 1800 has now.

From what we can see, Civ 7 will release with overall a lot more content than Civ 6 did at launch. A main complaint, the low number of civs per age, isn't actually less content, but more like the new age system with age specific civs making so you need a lot more content than previous civs to feel like you have a similar amount than before.

As already mentioned, one thing seems like it will come with less than previous games is map sizes at launch, which seems to be more like a consequence of having 10 civs per age at launch and possibly focusing on releasing an experience that works for all systems at launch before working on more system intensive map sizes that will only be available for some of the platforms the game is being released at.

I don't like that there are different editions at all, to be honest. I understand why companies do it, but I've never been a fan.

I don't mind different editions, especially when the bigger ones are manly about being a package with "a season pass" attached and /or cosmetics side content like ost and the like.

What I really dislikes is they having content that won't be available at later date in some form, even if more expensive than the extra amount for the more expensive version. If it is just cosmetic, then that is less of a bummer to me but still dislikes it.

For example, even though I pre-ordered the founder edition, would still really dislike if it's extra content, thje founder content pack will really not be available later for others as the date suggests. I'm hoping it means the pack won't, but at least the two personas will separately be available.