1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

To buy or not to buy the DLC

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by jabbawackybacky, Dec 10, 2010.

  1. highfive

    highfive Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    I think that you have a valid concern.

    My concern is that the game is buggy and basically unfinished. I'd rather see the single player game get to a polished state and the MP become playable before the publisher starts to nickle and dime the player with DLC.

    I'm just saying, do you really want paid DLC when there's no combat log or a game replay system currently in the game? I'd like my core features finished first before new content is added.
     
  2. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    But, as I keep pointing out, DLC funds these features. They actually help them come out sooner, not delay them.
     
  3. squeebus

    squeebus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    You have very low expectations for games. 2K isn't some mom 'n pop publisher selling sub-$10 games on Steam or Xbox Live.

    Major titles, like Civ 5, should have all core game mechanics and design features 95% complete, implemented and bug free when shipped.
     
  4. Horizons

    Horizons Needing fed again!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,374
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    This is sad. :( All the people who are stupid enough to buy the DLC will make a major stink if the new civs, scenarios and maps are included in future expansion packs.

    Moderator Action: In future, please don't call these people stupid.

    Ergo: either we will not get expansion packs (or they will be released a piecemeal DLCs), or we will get them but have to pay for the civs, maps and scenarios in the DLC separately - either way, it's going to cost more money for all of us. :(

    This always annoyed me more than Civ5 being incomplete because I knew, based on Civ4 vanilla and Civ3, that it would have taken at least one EXPANSION PACK and/or a few patches to put things right. But previous expansion packs turned out to be really good value for money.

    But all this DLC crap is just ... depressing.

    :(
     
  5. bite

    bite Unofficial Civilization Cartographer Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    4,236
    This is no different than when people complained that the BtS expansion contained all the civs from Warlords and thus they should get a discount for BtS.
     
  6. Iranon

    Iranon Deity Whipping Boy

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,214
    Location:
    Germany
    I'm not sure this would work in any other market. 'So sorry you bought a lemon... why not buy some aftermarket options, if enough people do that'll fund a recall and fix?'

    If a game can't be made in the time and budget set aside for it, I'd be more willing to accept placeholder art than placeholder gameplay.
    I especially have no sympathy if the developers made life unnecessarily hard for themselves: Wargame-like mechanics and 1upt in a game as open-ended as Civ would make it a huge challenge to code a convincing AI (note that I don't say 'good' - semblance sufficient to keep things playable is ambitious enough). That rapid horizontal growth needs to be checked was also known for a very long time, that Civ5 doesn't do this adequately was apparent just from reading the manual.

    The stuff costs nothing to make compared to the main game. Whether or not to buy it is like asking whether to take a slap without comment or turn the other cheek with a smile - neither will discourage further abuse and it's leaving out the very natural option to return the slap.
    Or to specifically refrain from buying the game itself until it's fixed as much as the questionable mechanics allow, available for a discount price with former DLC thrown in. If the only reactions to DLC are 'will earn them more money' and 'will be profit-neutral', it's going to see more and more unwholesome use and generally make so-called triple-a titles tend towards overblown overstyled overmarketed overexploited junk than genuine quality.
     
  7. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,079
    Location:
    Abroad
    The idea that DLC is somehow funding upcoming patches seems ludicrous to me. We have no evidence that DLC is what is fueling them, and besides, Jon Shafer personally said on a forum (that one which developers frequent, forgot the exact name, but he was quoted from there)--that he would be staying to develop the game further [not just abandoning it]. I'd assume that the truth of his statement doesn't depend on the success of the DLC. I'm sure it depends on the success of CiV, which as far as I know has been a commercial success despite strong criticism by fans of earlier Civs.

    DLC doesn't look like it takes much time to make. In the Mongolia scenario Gandhi, glasses and all, no name alterations, exist. Blergh. And Alexander speaks Koine Greek (of Alexander's ancient times btw) in a medieval time period scenario. Laziness? Time ran out? Who knows. I suspect that it might have been a bit of both.

    I would prefer it if Firaxis spent more time on patching the game, esp. in multiplayer, and maybe allowing moving units en masse in a easier *less micromanagement* focused way. Also, would be nice if the civs you liberate actually appreciate your action, rather than scowling at you at first glance (and then, later, oddly, voting for you in the UN despite their hatred of you anyway).

    I'm pretty darned sure the DLC will appear in a future expansion simply for compatibility reasons. Warlords civs appeared in BtS, and why else if not for compatibility reasons? People with the 2nd expack playing multiplayer vs. people who have vanilla+partial DLC vs. people playing with the 1st expack civs would be a true mess. To make connecting to others with different versions easier, I'm predicting the future expack will include the DLC.
     
  8. Toulouse

    Toulouse Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    106
    Co-sign.
     
  9. PieceOfMind

    PieceOfMind Drill IV Defender Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    9,319
    Location:
    Australia
    This is all fairly logical, but you're still assuming there will be an expansion pack.

    My guess is that yes there will be an expansion pack or more, but in regards to the civ DLC (Babs, Inca, Spain + possibly more) they will not be included in the expansion pack but will instead inevitably be offered as part of a bundle deal.
     
  10. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,068
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    To all against and/or for any kind of DLC, in size or quality.

    Stop, just stop arguing for naughty and yet again non-constructive reasons.

    -- Each & everyone of your arguments are valid.
    -- Consumer(s) freedom is at stake; you got money, then spend it as you damn well please.
    -- Developpers work (or not) for that cash. They either earn some or simply fail to convince anyone.
    -- The gaming world has & is changing by the minutes... we follow or stay in some dark caverns like apes.
    -- Wait a few months (even weeks & years) for a better deal is still and will always remain anybody's prerogative.

    So, why argue?!?

    Just play & have some fun.
     
  11. Honorable_Pawn

    Honorable_Pawn Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    :pat:


    Looks like someone learned their lesson.
     
  12. joyous_gard

    joyous_gard Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    476
    I would say "Not to buy." My hope is that they really repair things according to my vision and then release an expansion with all the previous DLC as part of the expansion. If they don't repair things according to my vision but come up with "6 New City-State Quests" and "A better looking Trading Post" as their expansion, then I will still not buy, even if the previous DLC is offered as part of the expansion.
     
  13. Honorable_Pawn

    Honorable_Pawn Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    Take a bow, Son. You said it all. Call a spade a spade I always say.
     
  14. Honorable_Pawn

    Honorable_Pawn Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    pffftt....who cares about game-play mechanics. Anyone know where I can get some Aztec warrior action-figurines?
     
  15. jabbawackybacky

    jabbawackybacky Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    116
    For me, the argument isnt with people buying the DLC. I don't mind them. The argument is with 2K charging a hefty price for it. Now, if this was the only DLC, that would be one thing, but they will probably have more released ... say they add 3 sets of DLC, that's $22.50 (price ~ $7.50) for six civs and three scenarios, assuming it follows the current model.

    As a customer, I have a right to demand what I'm paying for. Consumers should be advocates for themselves, otherwise they are liable to spend money unwisely.


    Compare this to BTS or Warlords. Yes you paid more money, but you got far more total content for the money you paid. You have new objectives (Apostolic palace victory), new wonders, new civs, scenarios, people, buildings, leaderheads, units, more strategic depths with vassalage, etc. And the game itself already initially came in a more "complete" manner, with all sorts of elements which aren't in the current game, like religion.
     
  16. eris

    eris King

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    623
    Location:
    On this forum
    As I understand, this DLC pack is the one that will qualify as the add in pack from the D2D Deluxe package, so I guess my vote on this question is already on record. I already paid for it (minus the one time discount). I am a Civ Fanatic and express it my way, by getting hold of as much Civ stuff I can get in my game that I find value for. Theoretically that is what everybody is doing in making their choice. Myself, I am admittedly insane about this game. The worst evidence being I enjoy playing Civ 5. I have no idea why anyone would want to listen to that.

    But on this one, I voted where it counted before I even knew how important I would feel it would be. I like that part.
     
  17. cletusowns

    cletusowns Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    I'd totally buy the DLC because despite a few issues I really love playing the game.

    HOWEVER, I will NOT be buying the DLC simply because I can't play ANY of the added content online! I play multiplayer with friends almost every game and I simply can't comprehend paying any additional money for single player only content!
     
  18. charon2112

    charon2112 King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    I'm starting to think that paying for more civs is a sneaky way of getting us to pay $70 instead of $50 for their game. They obviously had been working on spain and inca before civ V's release date, IMO all civs that they created should have been in the first release of the game. Or released later for free.
     
  19. Kerosene31

    Kerosene31 Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2001
    Messages:
    402
    People need to get over the DLC hate.

    They made it clear before the game was out that it was coming.

    Plus, what is the difference if it exists and you don't buy it or if they simply never make it?

    I love having option to add on to my game. The patch is supposed to be out before that so it isn't like they aren't supporting the game.

    Buy it, or don't. Why does this have to be an epic argument?
     
  20. Rohili

    Rohili King

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    727
    To buy or not to buy? That's simple. Look at this in economic terms - every decision entails an opportunity cost. If you buy the DLC, that's $7.50 you could have spent elsewhere. You need to ask yourself whether the enjoyment you will get from the DLC exceeds the enjoyment you would get from anything else that you could have bought with the $7.50 (e.g. a movie, a meal, a book, three bags of chips, 1/5 of another game, whatever).

    If you decide that the DLC would give you the most enjoyment out of all these options, then you should buy the DLC. Otherwise, you shouldn't. Any other reason for not buying (e.g. trying to "punish" 2K for releasing an unfinished game, or because you disapprove of the DLC model) is foolish and economically irrational.
     

Share This Page