Paradox Model is the Way of the Future for Warhammer.

LolTHELol

Paradox games have huge amount of DLCs, if you buy them all together at a later date it could feel very overwhelming, but if you buy them as they come out and think about the number of hours and new content they are adding you see it is actually not that expensive. Most importantly every DLC comes with a considerably big FLC that adds new mechanics to the game.

I think CA should use a similar model, release smaller, cheaper 1 LL, few units DLC packs for some faction with missing units and inferior mechanics. And add that faction new mechanics for free with the DLC money. As an example: say give Empire new mechanics or update their mechanics considerably, but also release a Knightly Orders DLC that adds 2-3 new units and a single LL starting in the New World. People who do not buy the DLC will not have access to few units but will get access to the new and improved Empire faction for free.

Similarly, a tiny DLC adding Neferata as a starting LL at the different position for the Vampires could come with free updated tech tree and mechanics to Vampires and so on for other core factions.

For DLC faction bundle the content in a pack as an example: add Ghorgon and a new LL for Beastmen, 1 unit and Lord to Chaos, 1 LL and unit to Wood Elves, and possibly one more Bretonnia LL into a pack. But do change the horde mechanics for free, give Wood Elves new tech tree for free and improve their mechanics, and improve Bretonnia mechanics wise as well . So, this way shiny new units are the DLC, mechanics are free for all.

These DLCs should even cost less than QnC, since the content would be less. Or cost the same price if they are adding similar amount of content.

Hopefully this will also be an incentive for CA to release Patches more regularly as well, with the release of each new DLC/FLC.

What is funny that we must be the only Community on Internet who actually asks for more DLCs. But CA just refuses it. Just look at the steam score of ToB or better looks at the difference in upvotes for any article relating to Warhammer compared to 3K in reddit. Warhammer is the golden egg laying goose.

Ephraim_Dalton

So you want them to sell you unit portraits for $10? Or basic campaign mechanics for $20? And only pretend to listen to the buyers while doing what they want anyway?

Well yeah, if you said yes to all three, let's hope CA becomes more like Paradox.

PoorManatee6197

Agree, i would totally pay 2€-3€ for a little DLC with 1 LL or some missing units, sadly its not going to happen.

hurricane501

No its not the future lol... the future of this game is dying very fast.

Unless they fix end turn times in game 3 its already deas

LolTHELol

Ephraim_Dalton said:

So you want them to sell you unit portraits for $10? Or basic campaign mechanics for $20? And only pretend to listen to the buyers while doing what they want anyway?

Well yeah, if you said yes to all three, let's hope CA becomes more like Paradox.

In my country Stellaris: Distant Stars Story Pack costs the same amount as the QnC. And well distant stars story pack for me did added more to the Stellaris than QnC did for Warhammer 2.
Stellaris: Plantoids Species Pack costs less and adds new ship sets and models and portraits so on...

I do not want to go into which game has more for the price but yeah CA should learn a thing or two from Paradox and if Paradox did charge 10$ for portraits they should not learn from their mistakes but from their successes.

Ephraim_Dalton

LolTHELol said:

Ephraim_Dalton said:

So you want them to sell you unit portraits for $10? Or basic campaign mechanics for $20? And only pretend to listen to the buyers while doing what they want anyway?

Well yeah, if you said yes to all three, let's hope CA becomes more like Paradox.

In my country Stellaris: Distant Stars Story Pack costs the same amount as the QnC. And well distant stars story pack for me did added more to the Stellaris than QnC did for Warhammer 2.
Stellaris: Plantoids Species Pack costs less and adds new ship sets and models and portraits so on...

I do not want to go into which game has more for the price but yeah CA should learn a thing or two from Paradox and if Paradox did charge 10$ for portraits they should not learn from their mistakes but from their successes.

Story packs are one of the biggest wastes of money. Stellaris is awful.

TheArid

+1

LolTHELol

Ephraim_Dalton said:

LolTHELol said:

Ephraim_Dalton said:

So you want them to sell you unit portraits for $10? Or basic campaign mechanics for $20? And only pretend to listen to the buyers while doing what they want anyway?

Well yeah, if you said yes to all three, let's hope CA becomes more like Paradox.

In my country Stellaris: Distant Stars Story Pack costs the same amount as the QnC. And well distant stars story pack for me did added more to the Stellaris than QnC did for Warhammer 2.
Stellaris: Plantoids Species Pack costs less and adds new ship sets and models and portraits so on...

I do not want to go into which game has more for the price but yeah CA should learn a thing or two from Paradox and if Paradox did charge 10$ for portraits they should not learn from their mistakes but from their successes.

Story packs are one of the biggest wastes of money. Stellaris is awful.

If you do not like the game fine, it is your taste, hell it means you have less to play.

Just stop trying to derail the topic, This post is not about comparing both games, it is about a different game companies DLC policy and how to possibly implement it to solve our charlemagne problem with smaller cheaper more frequent DLCs coming with big mechanical overhauls FLCs.

If you do not like the idea again fine then.

Kelefane

The Paradox DLC model is an appalling money grabbing greedy mess. No thanks.

Wyvax

I have both games and enjoy them equally. Can't see much to complain about with Stellaris dlc material, if it's purely cosmetic then there's nothing forcing me to by it and each DLC that adds new features and mechanics always comes alongside a patch that provides new features and mechanics itself.

There is absolutely no point in cosmetic DLC for Warhammer, that's for sure. But lord and unit packs that add something for both core and explansion races are something that's been asked for loads of times. There's no reason that expansions be pigeonholed into either race/campaign packs or the stereotypical lord packs. Plus more DLC means more funds, which means more incentive to produce FLC as well.

Crossil

Paradox has a very niche audience and it quite effectively continuously develops its mechanics until they have extremely complex gameplay. Clearly something TW publing doesn't understand requires development time and is extremely reluctant actually paying for.

Which is funny since one of best parts of Warhammer DLC is new introduced mechanics.

Surge_2

hurricane501 said:

No its not the future lol... the future of this game is dying very fast.

Unless they fix end turn times in game 3 its already deas

Adding a few more factions isnt going to break the game at this point. Upgrade your PC.

corvo

**** no.

Tayvar

Well the 'big DLCs' sure don't tend to be big enough to include all the missing units and characters, so ya Creative Assembly should learn from Paradox Interactive and Talisman: Digital Edition.

carnotaurus

as some one with over 2000 hours in hoi4,eu4 and ck2 combined no thanks.

LolTHELol

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

ConstantineZAyn

Sort of agreed. They should have done something similar. One Total War Warhammer game and then just DLC and patching for it after that. After a year we get a big expansion that adds the new world to the campaign map with all of its races. Would be way better for everyone. Easy to understand for new customers, better patching, support, no norsca debacle, no need for two campaigns, etc.

LolTHELol

carnotaurus said:

as some one with over 2000 hours in hoi4,eu4 and ck2 combined no thanks.

Okay, so you do not like their DLC policy even with 2000 hours in those games.

My solution to missing units, bare bone mechanics of old factions compared to new and lack of patches might then not happen. But what is your solution then? How are we to get more bug fixes when CA ties bug fixes to new content or the missing units when all we have gotten so far was a slayer unit with a different axe model. Even if you read Richs post in reddit he states they cannot add new content to game if it is not DLC.

We also think about user reviews on Warhammer 1 which do complain about the amount of DLC. Obviously we couldn’t add new content to the game without DLC, but we think getting the balance right is important.

We know they pretty much wont implement units due to charlemagne problem (the cost). I would love to hear more detailed response, a solution.

corvo

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

oh, cool, lets go with stellaris, it has 2 years iirc:




this game sells you such a little content at completly high scalated prices, its crazy. and the only free thing are some simple potraits, and thats what you want?.

now warhammer 1, who has almost the same time in market:



("gratuito" mean "free" btw)

FF sake xD, even adding warhamer 2 dlc to that list, the two parts of warhammer are cheaper, and have faaar more content that that paradox game.

I would took CA dlcs, a thousand times before the DLC policy of a paradox game.

psychoak

DLC doesn't make enough money for them to just do the whole series that way. The more you add, the fewer people purchase, it's a psychological effect of the increasing total price.

If you consider that CK2 is a bug riddled mess, that plays far less well than it did around The Old Gods, a few years back, then no, it's not cheap. It's been a long slide into **** for four years and change, with no signs of improvement.

We basically have the PDX model already. CA releases increasingly frequent DLC for the TW games, and only does major patching in conjunction with those releases. It's not a particularly great model, as they introduce new issues with each DLC, and nothing is ever really cleaned up to a highly polished state as a result.

I'd much prefer more patching, of the variety that doesn't reintroduce new glitches. For that, CA will have to streamline their development model, because it's their layered system of development that causes them all this grief as they split and recombine trees over and over. That will cost them in efficiency, unfortunately.

LolTHELol

corvo said:

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

oh, cool, lets go with stellaris, it has 2 years iirc:




this game sells you such a little content at completly high scalated prices, its crazy. and the only free thing are some simple potraits, and thats what you want?.

now warhammer 1, who has almost the same time in market:



("gratuito" mean "free" btw)

I would took CA dlcs, a thousand times before the DLC policy of a paradox game.

Comparisons is wrong again. Totalwar Warhammer 2 is direct continuation of the first game, you must include that into totalwar warhammers price.

Also no they did not give only small stuff as free, they have pretty much added so much new game play mechanics to game since release even without DLCs.

Also lastly they have so much more free mods adding and completely changing the game you cannot even compare stellaris modding with the mods available to warhammer due to modding tool limitations.

Again I am not asking for CA to increase their DLC prices but in order for them to actually implement all this quality of life improvements and most wanted missing units, that to create relatively cheap and small DLCs in between bigger ones. I do not want CA to copy the mistakes another company makes just take their ideas and improve upon them.

edit: Also your total price for Stellaris is so wrong you have included the NOVA and GALAXY Edition costs -40 from your price

Kelefane

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

If you ended up buying CK2 and all its DLC in one swoop, you're talking around 300 dollars for a single game. That is outrageous. People these days who have never played it before stay far away from that game due to that. The WH trilogy would cost even more then that assuming it took on a CK2/Paradox like model. Who wants to pay $1000 for 3 (THREE!) games? LMAO. That is crazy. I mean, a lot of people don't have $300 to throw at a single game, much less $1000 for three games. You can buy a crap ton of good games for these prices.

So yeah, if WH took on the Paradox DLC policy, it would turn them into niche games and it would also alienate a large portion of the player base and potential new buyers. Games like CK2 are exclusive to certain buyers who can afford it. Your average Joe every day gamer wont touch games with a deep sea of DLC that add up into an overly expensive mess.

In the end, the WH trilogy will be expensive enough without adding Paradox's money grabbing greedy DLC policy to it.

Warlord_Lu_Bu

No.


However... as I've said in other threads, when CA finish their games... they should create a "Buy it all" collection for completed games... like Total War: Attila (if it's complete) then it should have a "Buy it all" offer that includes the base game, with the DLC that is a little cheaper than buying it all separately. This would be good for people who want to get into the game, but are waiting for it to be complete and do not want to buy everything with individual price tags.

Paradox Interactive are a little... pathetic though, selling PORTRAITS and wall papers for Race DLC prices.... oh my days... why do these companies become such blood suckers like Blizzard, EA, Bethesda, Sony, etc

Tayvar

Kelefane said:

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

If you ended up buying CK2 and all its DLC in one swoop, you're talking around 300 dollars for a single game. That is outrageous. People these days who have never played it before stay far away from that game due to that. The WH trilogy would cost even more then that assuming it took on a CK2/Paradox like model. Who wants to pay $1000 for 3 (THREE!) games? LMAO. That is crazy. I mean, a lot of people don't have $300 to throw at a single game, much less $1000 for three games. You can buy a crap ton of good games for these prices.

So yeah, if WH took on the Paradox DLC policy, it would turn them into niche games and it would also alienate a large portion of the player base and potential buyers. Games like CK2 are exclusive to certain buyers who can afford it. Your average Joe every day gamer wont touch games with a deep sea of DLC that add up into an overly expensive mess.

In the end, the WH trilogy will be expensive enough without adding Paradox's money grabbing greedy DLC policy to it.

Still much cheaper than getting so much Warhammer's Units in the Tabletop, and adding more content should be top priority, I mean look how many units the Beastmen miss thanks to cheapness.

LolTHELol

Kelefane said:

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

If you ended up buying CK2 and all its DLC in one swoop, you're talking around 300 dollars for a single game. That is outrageous. People these days who have never played it before stay far away from that game due to that. The WH trilogy would cost even more then that assuming it took on a CK2/Paradox like model. Who wants to pay $1000 for 3 (THREE!) games? LMAO. That is crazy. I mean, a lot of people don't have $300 to throw at a single game, much less $1000 for three games. You can buy a crap ton of good games for these prices.

So yeah, if WH took on the Paradox DLC policy, it would turn them into niche games and it would also alienate a large portion of the player base and potential buyers. Games like CK2 are exclusive to certain buyers who can afford it. Your average Joe every day gamer wont touch games with a deep sea of DLC that add up into an overly expensive mess.

In the end, the WH trilogy will be expensive enough without adding Paradox's money grabbing greedy DLC policy to it.

The thing is like you have said that huge entry price for new comers is going to happen anyway. We are looking at 3 base games with multiple DLCs (more then 15 most likely)

And your average person could just but anyone first try it and if they like it buy the rest slowly by slowly.

I think warhammer has one advantage over Paradox and it is a big one when it comes to DLC. If you do not like one race do not buy their DLC. Just purchase the ones you like. Also every faction and unit will be on the map against you if you only just purchase the base 3 games. (They will most likely be cheaper by the time every DLC of the 3rd one gets released)

But again, there might be other solutions missing stuff problem as in huge game one race update in game 3 or a final big expansion pack in game 3 but that means we will again have no patches for ages, with CAs policy to tie patches to new content.

tgoodenow

No because they won’t make 100 dlcs. The invest for CA dlc is more upfront than paradox.

I would love some game mechanic DLCs though. Trade and diplomacy are so underdeveloped after all these years it’s shameful.

Kelefane

Tayvar said:

Kelefane said:

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

If you ended up buying CK2 and all its DLC in one swoop, you're talking around 300 dollars for a single game. That is outrageous. People these days who have never played it before stay far away from that game due to that. The WH trilogy would cost even more then that assuming it took on a CK2/Paradox like model. Who wants to pay $1000 for 3 (THREE!) games? LMAO. That is crazy. I mean, a lot of people don't have $300 to throw at a single game, much less $1000 for three games. You can buy a crap ton of good games for these prices.

So yeah, if WH took on the Paradox DLC policy, it would turn them into niche games and it would also alienate a large portion of the player base and potential buyers. Games like CK2 are exclusive to certain buyers who can afford it. Your average Joe every day gamer wont touch games with a deep sea of DLC that add up into an overly expensive mess.

In the end, the WH trilogy will be expensive enough without adding Paradox's money grabbing greedy DLC policy to it.

Still much cheaper than getting so much Warhammer's Units in the Tabletop, and adding more content should be top priority, I mean look how many units the Beastmen miss thanks to cheapness.

What does any of this have to do with tabletop? A lot of folks who play the TW:WH series never even played tabletop (I'm one of them) and then there are some TW:WH gamers who have no clue that the tabletop game even existed! So that argument is fallible.

And yeah, to play devils advocate here, the folks who could afford the tabletop game and its units probably could afford a TW:WH trilogy with that expensive money grabbing Paradox DLC policy. However, we are talking about a video game here and its a completely different hobby then tabletop gaming (of any kind) is. Its apples and oranges.

Video game players usually have a budget and scoff at high prices in this particular industry.

Walrus

corvo said:

**** no.

Try the price in reais

Muemmelmonster

I just hope that they will go this route instead of popping out bad FLC stuff that somewhat imrproves the old factions to newer ones. Al least I would be happy to buy DLC that improves Warhammer1 and 2 factions.

Sadly that makes only sense with the 3rd game, because, if they do it already with the Warhammer2 installment then they have to do it again with Wh3, that makes no sense financially speaking.

Kelefane

LolTHELol said:

Kelefane said:

LolTHELol said:

corvo said:

**** no.

Well that game came out back in 2012, we are talking about 6 years of DLC. I say it is cheap if you consider every thing.

Even now if you want to buy both warhammer and every DLC it will look very expensive.

If you ended up buying CK2 and all its DLC in one swoop, you're talking around 300 dollars for a single game. That is outrageous. People these days who have never played it before stay far away from that game due to that. The WH trilogy would cost even more then that assuming it took on a CK2/Paradox like model. Who wants to pay $1000 for 3 (THREE!) games? LMAO. That is crazy. I mean, a lot of people don't have $300 to throw at a single game, much less $1000 for three games. You can buy a crap ton of good games for these prices.

So yeah, if WH took on the Paradox DLC policy, it would turn them into niche games and it would also alienate a large portion of the player base and potential buyers. Games like CK2 are exclusive to certain buyers who can afford it. Your average Joe every day gamer wont touch games with a deep sea of DLC that add up into an overly expensive mess.

In the end, the WH trilogy will be expensive enough without adding Paradox's money grabbing greedy DLC policy to it.

The thing is like you have said that huge entry price for new comers is going to happen anyway. We are looking at 3 base games with multiple DLCs (more then 15 most likely) .

So yeah, lets make it even worse and compound the problem even further. I mean, whats another $500 once you get up to a certain price range, right?

No thanks.

carnotaurus

PS paradox is not that diffrent than ca right now hoi4 had a lot of game breakaing bugs that wher only resendly fixed and the next dlc is due in 2019.