Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Steam Reviews, Paywalls, and the Effect on DLC Production

13

Comments

  • TumbleTumble Posts: 392Registered Users
    DLC pay wall is real. I know people who enjoyed wh1 but wont get wh2 because they feel like they have to spend $100 on game 2 + dlc.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    Tumble said:

    DLC pay wall is real. I know people who enjoyed wh1 but wont get wh2 because they feel like they have to spend $100 on game 2 + dlc.

    Only that they don't. Why exactly are they buying things full price?
  • ZelnikZelnik Posts: 285Registered Users
    Xenos7 said:

    Zelnik said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Zelnik said:


    Argument 1: This game and all content that CA creates is art, and we should be happy to pay money for said art. Criticisms can be ignored if unsightly because ultimately, we have no bearing on what is made or added into this game. FLC are like those wonderful extra strokes on a canvas that add to the whole, and since they don't cost anything to the consumer, being critical of them is forbidden.

    Uhm, no, not really. I believe art should be free exactly because it is art, at least after the author has expired. You should be free to read War and Peace without paying anything. But DLC are a product, so just pay for it. Or not. Who cares. People review bombing optional content when they can simply not purchase it are just idiots and should be ignored.
    tell that to the bookstore owner, I am pretty sure they want you to buy the book instead of stealing it, or squatting in their shop. Or the printers who put it to paper.

    Nothing is free, somehow, somewhere, someone paid for it. Artists who display their art for free tend to have other income, starve, or aren't particularly good artists.
    I said you should be able to *read* it for free, not to own a physical copy for free. And indeed you can. Just go to the library or download an ebook. That's important because art should be accessible to everyone, regardless of wealth or status, being a fundamental part of human experience. A DLC featuring zombie pirates isn't, so you have no right whatsoever to ask for it to be free. That's the price: don't like it, don't buy it. Very simple.


    Wonderfully utopian that ultimately makes the poor poorer (since most artists are astonishingly poor to begin with). Also, Libraries need funding too, they just get it from other sources.

    However, i agree, don't like it, don't buy it, but that mentality should always be on the customer side, never the seller side. It's bad PR and worse sales technique. CA should have the mentality that everyone should buy their content, and listen should they want to remain fluid.
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 8,865Registered Users
    Tumble said:

    DLC pay wall is real. I know people who enjoyed wh1 but wont get wh2 because they feel like they have to spend $100 on game 2 + dlc.

    It can be argued that the lords DLC are needed for a full experience, more because of the missing units that they add than the lords themselves, but a player don't have to buy any of the DLCs races to have a full experience with the base races.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • ExarchExarch Posts: 413Registered Users
    I am very happy with the content of the campaign packs and their price, they add a lot to the game, but don't have any negative impact on those who don't buy them.

    The lord packs on the other hand are... A bit problematic, as they bring extras to the original races that are paid for by the price of the base game, and they do affect how the game plays out. Not only do they affect the campaign through confederation as currently implented, they also act as pay2win in multiplayer, making the base factions (that you have already paid for!) weakest if you do not have the lord packs, and so have roster holes and no RoR.

    Once the lizardmen/skaven lord pack drops, any new player who buys TWW2 will not be able to play MP fairly without being forced to pay for more content for the races they already own to play on a level field, and there is something wrong with that. At least in TWW1 everyone eventually got full brettonia with RoR for free.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    Zelnik said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Zelnik said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Zelnik said:


    Argument 1: This game and all content that CA creates is art, and we should be happy to pay money for said art. Criticisms can be ignored if unsightly because ultimately, we have no bearing on what is made or added into this game. FLC are like those wonderful extra strokes on a canvas that add to the whole, and since they don't cost anything to the consumer, being critical of them is forbidden.

    Uhm, no, not really. I believe art should be free exactly because it is art, at least after the author has expired. You should be free to read War and Peace without paying anything. But DLC are a product, so just pay for it. Or not. Who cares. People review bombing optional content when they can simply not purchase it are just idiots and should be ignored.
    tell that to the bookstore owner, I am pretty sure they want you to buy the book instead of stealing it, or squatting in their shop. Or the printers who put it to paper.

    Nothing is free, somehow, somewhere, someone paid for it. Artists who display their art for free tend to have other income, starve, or aren't particularly good artists.
    I said you should be able to *read* it for free, not to own a physical copy for free. And indeed you can. Just go to the library or download an ebook. That's important because art should be accessible to everyone, regardless of wealth or status, being a fundamental part of human experience. A DLC featuring zombie pirates isn't, so you have no right whatsoever to ask for it to be free. That's the price: don't like it, don't buy it. Very simple.


    Wonderfully utopian that ultimately makes the poor poorer (since most artists are astonishingly poor to begin with). Also, Libraries need funding too, they just get it from other sources.

    However, i agree, don't like it, don't buy it, but that mentality should always be on the customer side, never the seller side. It's bad PR and worse sales technique. CA should have the mentality that everyone should buy their content, and listen should they want to remain fluid.
    Since these people are asking for less DLC, how exactly listening to them would benefit CA? They can't sell a product which doesn't exist.
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 8,865Registered Users
    Exarch said:

    I am very happy with the content of the campaign packs and their price, they add a lot to the game, but don't have any negative impact on those who don't buy them.

    The lord packs on the other hand are... A bit problematic, as they bring extras to the original races that are paid for by the price of the base game, and they do affect how the game plays out. Not only do they affect the campaign through confederation as currently implented, they also act as pay2win in multiplayer, making the base factions (that you have already paid for!) weakest if you do not have the lord packs, and so have roster holes and no RoR.

    Once the lizardmen/skaven lord pack drops, any new player who buys TWW2 will not be able to play MP fairly without being forced to pay for more content for the races they already own to play on a level field, and there is something wrong with that. At least in TWW1 everyone eventually got full brettonia with RoR for free.

    Interesting to note about the Dawn of War Expansion Packs, that was mainly adding extra races, the players had needed to buy them if they wanted extra units for the base races.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • SniperBob177SniperBob177 Posts: 275Registered Users
    Critical point to this is whether:

    1) Your playing in real time. I.e. brought both games and associated DLC as it's released. In which case your likely to argue for content drought.

    2) Or whether your getting into the game via WH1 / WH2 sales, and then finding all the DLC is required to play the full game. In which case your more likely to argue about paywalls etc.

    I'm in 1) and for me the DLC in WH2 isn't coming quick enough compared to WH1.

    However having brought historical Total War games over the past 12 months I understand 2). In which case just buy all the DLC on a steam sale, or just the base game then wait for the next Steam sale.
  • ExarchExarch Posts: 413Registered Users
    @Tayvar That sounds like a terrible system, at least lord packs are better than that!

    @SniperBob177 I've been buying the dlc in real time, but not Queen and the Crone. As I have all game 1 and the dlc, and have only just started playing MP, I am fine with not playing as elves.

    But the lord packs look more and more like cut content. If you compare what you get for a dlc race pack vs an original game race, the dlc race is 'complete' with 4 lords, unique mechanics and RoR.

    If you include the flc, HE and DE as base races have three lords, incomplete rosters and no RoR. Only with Q&C are they on a par with the race packs.

    This means, in MP especially, the game ks designed so that you have to buy DLC, or play the game at a disadvantage, even if you only use one race, which I find pretty shabby.

    In SP it is less bad, as you can have a fun campaign without the lord pack units, and roster holes are not as important ans in PvP.

  • JadawinKhanidiJadawinKhanidi Posts: 416Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    This isn't about art or whether it should be free or whatever. It's about massive amounts of content that are produced and offered for sale. I don't know any other game that has so many playable factions that are not all the same in different color, but actually very different. Which other game has more than even just 4 different races? Not counting games like Civilization that may have dozens of factions but they are all 95% the same and use the exact same mechanics.

    If I had come to TWW1 as I did with no prior TW history and they'd told me that I have to spend 150 bucks on this one game I'd have shown them the finger and moved on. But I guess that's about the amount I've spent now on the two games and all DLC's (first game on sale, many DLCs's too, but second game and a few DLC's at full price).

    And it was worth it because I really spent a lot of time playing and enjoying the game. But if I was a more casual player and liked the game but played just two or three campaigns before moving on, I could just have bought the base game and spend much less and still got a lot for my money. Imho the DLC pricing was generally very fair for what was offered.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    Exarch said:

    @Tayvar That sounds like a terrible system, at least lord packs are better than that!

    @SniperBob177 I've been buying the dlc in real time, but not Queen and the Crone. As I have all game 1 and the dlc, and have only just started playing MP, I am fine with not playing as elves.

    But the lord packs look more and more like cut content. If you compare what you get for a dlc race pack vs an original game race, the dlc race is 'complete' with 4 lords, unique mechanics and RoR.

    If you include the flc, HE and DE as base races have three lords, incomplete rosters and no RoR. Only with Q&C are they on a par with the race packs.

    This means, in MP especially, the game ks designed so that you have to buy DLC, or play the game at a disadvantage, even if you only use one race, which I find pretty shabby.

    In SP it is less bad, as you can have a fun campaign without the lord pack units, and roster holes are not as important ans in PvP.

    Sorry if I sound patronizing, but I really don't understand... why don't you simply buy it? It's like 5€ on some shops. I mean, surely for some people in some countries that's a significant amount, but if you own a PC capable of running TW Warhammer then obviously is not. I have two approaches to games with DLC
    1) Buy them and the DLC as they come, if I really like the game
    2) Wait for a full package at a discount down the line

    I simply don't understand what's the point in playing a game you love without all the content. You're just missing out.
  • ExarchExarch Posts: 413Registered Users
    @JadawinKhanidi

    I think there are two things a dlc policy should do to be worthwhile and fair:

    1/ Is the extra content fun, good quality and worth the price?

    In general, the quality of dlc, especially the more recent race packs has been very good. At face value, as lord packs are quite cheap, they arguably fulfill this requirement too.

    2/ Does the presence of dlc negatively affect the experience of those who choose not to buy it?

    If so, the game design itself is inducing people to buy dlc in order to properly play the content they have already paid for.

    No problems for race packs here, but not owning a lord pack does limit your ability to be competitive with a faction you already own on MP, as well as limiting your diplomatic options in campaign (no more peaceful unification of Ulthuan..).
  • DebaucheeDebauchee Junior Member Posts: 1,376Registered Users

    Debauchee said:



    What is generous is that you have the content in your game, even if unplayable, whether you bought the DLC or not. With Paradox you simply get nothing unless you bought it and since they'll balance the game with the new content in mind, you'll quickly run into difficulties with your more vanilla games.


    Yeah right, you totally don't get into any difficulties when playing your vanilla skaven. The game totally is not balanced with extra units and RoR you get from lord packs. Yes, you can skip some lacking or subjectively uninteresting DLC, but modern TW is not a game you should be playing vanilla either.
    Moreover, it is simply not true, that you get nothing without buying DLC from Paradox, becuase the base game constanlty gets updated. On top of that, it is generoues, that when someone joins your lobby in multiplayr, he can enjoy all the DLC the host has. Even Amplitude has this policy, I don't know why CA won't adopt it.
    Skaven is a special case because CA clearly hates them, but if it's content for a race you don't care about you can skip it and still encounter it in your campaigns.

    Also, nope, Paradox updates with the new content in mind, so whatever updates you get will not be balanced for what you have. I've played enough Paradox games to know the drill. Buy the new content or have your games broken, that's the Paradox way.
    There is no special case for Skaven: a race without a lord pack and RoR quickly falls behind others in terms of power. Want your faction to stay viable and competitve - buy a lord pack. Not to mention Warrios of Chaos: the consensus on this forums is that you have to buy "Game III" in order for them to be enjoyable or adequately fleshed out.
    By the way, Paradox games actually build upon one vanilla game, whereas Warhammer trilogy... When was the last time owners of "Game 1" got something new? May 2017, I guess? After that point your either buy an expandalone or just play an outdated game.
    Modern TW series, and especially Warhammer, rely on DLC content just as much as any Paradox title.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Posts: 1,439Registered Users
    Xenos7 said:

    Exarch said:

    @Tayvar That sounds like a terrible system, at least lord packs are better than that!

    @SniperBob177 I've been buying the dlc in real time, but not Queen and the Crone. As I have all game 1 and the dlc, and have only just started playing MP, I am fine with not playing as elves.

    But the lord packs look more and more like cut content. If you compare what you get for a dlc race pack vs an original game race, the dlc race is 'complete' with 4 lords, unique mechanics and RoR.

    If you include the flc, HE and DE as base races have three lords, incomplete rosters and no RoR. Only with Q&C are they on a par with the race packs.

    This means, in MP especially, the game ks designed so that you have to buy DLC, or play the game at a disadvantage, even if you only use one race, which I find pretty shabby.

    In SP it is less bad, as you can have a fun campaign without the lord pack units, and roster holes are not as important ans in PvP.

    Sorry if I sound patronizing, but I really don't understand... why don't you simply buy it? It's like 5€ on some shops. I mean, surely for some people in some countries that's a significant amount, but if you own a PC capable of running TW Warhammer then obviously is not. I have two approaches to games with DLC
    1) Buy them and the DLC as they come, if I really like the game
    2) Wait for a full package at a discount down the line

    I simply don't understand what's the point in playing a game you love without all the content. You're just missing out.
    I don't think he's arguing that he thinks the Lord Packs are too expensive or that he doesn't buy them. But rather that the practice of 'cut content' turns players off in general and looks shady regardless.

    Like, I don't think anyone thought the 'Cataphract Camels' for Rome 2 were too expensive when they finally released in that Beasts of War pack. But the fact that they were sold separately later on in the first place really angered a lot of people and I understand why. The camels were demo'd in a Let's Play battle long before release of the base game and before any DLC was announced. They were then not included in any of the base game rosters, and got sold separately in a DLC pack after release. Like, I don't care what CA's excuse was....that looks really greedy and anti-consumer at face value observation. Just because the camels were less than $10 (other units were included too) isn't the point. The point was it was a smarmy thing for CA to do, period.

    For me, the Lord Packs don't feel like 'cut content' or the same degree of smarmy as the camels thing. But they do feel a little gimmicky and 'Pay to Win' in a way for MP. Which isn't a good business practice. Don't get me wrong, I've bought all the lord packs so far, enjoyed them, and gotten my money's worth. I don't think they're over priced. I will continue to buy them. But yeah, even as a fan, I find the practice a little slimy. And if you aren't specifically a fan or are on the fence, I can understand why the practice might be a slight deterrent from getting involved in the series.
  • FifthOfSpaghettiFifthOfSpaghetti Posts: 1,566Registered Users
    SiWI said:

    I sometimes wonder how people complaining about DLC get they pay checks.
    What ever they work they surely understand that in order to have more you need to pay more right? because making more cost more.
    I not saying there are no cases of DLC's being bad, but relative speaking is not only CA relative sparse with DLC's they also tend to give relative lot. Granted the later is a perk of strategy games but still.

    20 bucks for 40+ hours of entertainment isn't a bad deal.
    You can do much worse then that.

    I want to second this.

    Things cost time and money to make for us. Within the base game we get a lot of content. I’ve got over 1000+ hours between the two games and I’ve yet to complete a Dwarf Campaign, HE/DE campaign, and many other campaigns just because there is SO much to do.

    I went into the photography field for a brief amount of time and what I learned from that is that people are cheap, and largely ignorant to the amount of effort and time it requires to deliver a quality product and would rather pay you with “experience” and “publicity” whenever they can. This is universal to all fields and businesses. Now I’m not saying feel bad for the big corporations but take a moment to realize that 20$ is 20$(Okay I’m Canadian I pay like 35$ for this stuff pretty much).

    CA delivers Some of the BEST dlc I’ve ever purchased, we get so much from it. And at some point when you start calling it cut content, how much really is cut? TWWH1 released, Doom Divers weren’t advertised but ended up in the game last minute because they finished them. Bone Giant, released after tomb kings probably cause it wasn’t ready on time. Harpies were given to Beastmen when they were completed for Dark Elves. Could have been a paywall for cut content but CA gives us things that their working on just cause.

    I really believe that people complaining about cost, cut content, and the like aren’t part of the core audience that CA is aiming this product at. And are just complaining for the sake of complaining. They want Paradox games but why not look at the game Paradox Games produces VS Total War.(pics below)

    Crusader kings is just a map with boxes going back and forth, the units are just stats with no models. It’s all just an algorithm. No problem if you enjoy that game, I have a lot of friends that do, but do not compare the two games when talking about cost.


  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    Valkaar said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Exarch said:

    @Tayvar That sounds like a terrible system, at least lord packs are better than that!

    @SniperBob177 I've been buying the dlc in real time, but not Queen and the Crone. As I have all game 1 and the dlc, and have only just started playing MP, I am fine with not playing as elves.

    But the lord packs look more and more like cut content. If you compare what you get for a dlc race pack vs an original game race, the dlc race is 'complete' with 4 lords, unique mechanics and RoR.

    If you include the flc, HE and DE as base races have three lords, incomplete rosters and no RoR. Only with Q&C are they on a par with the race packs.

    This means, in MP especially, the game ks designed so that you have to buy DLC, or play the game at a disadvantage, even if you only use one race, which I find pretty shabby.

    In SP it is less bad, as you can have a fun campaign without the lord pack units, and roster holes are not as important ans in PvP.

    Sorry if I sound patronizing, but I really don't understand... why don't you simply buy it? It's like 5€ on some shops. I mean, surely for some people in some countries that's a significant amount, but if you own a PC capable of running TW Warhammer then obviously is not. I have two approaches to games with DLC
    1) Buy them and the DLC as they come, if I really like the game
    2) Wait for a full package at a discount down the line

    I simply don't understand what's the point in playing a game you love without all the content. You're just missing out.
    I don't think he's arguing that he thinks the Lord Packs are too expensive or that he doesn't buy them. But rather that the practice of 'cut content' turns players off in general and looks shady regardless.

    Like, I don't think anyone thought the 'Cataphract Camels' for Rome 2 were too expensive when they finally released in that Beasts of War pack. But the fact that they were sold separately later on in the first place really angered a lot of people and I understand why. The camels were demo'd in a Let's Play battle long before release of the base game and before any DLC was announced. They were then not included in any of the base game rosters, and got sold separately in a DLC pack after release. Like, I don't care what CA's excuse was....that looks really greedy and anti-consumer at face value observation. Just because the camels were less than $10 (other units were included too) isn't the point. The point was it was a smarmy thing for CA to do, period.

    For me, the Lord Packs don't feel like 'cut content' or the same degree of smarmy as the camels thing. But they do feel a little gimmicky and 'Pay to Win' in a way for MP. Which isn't a good business practice. Don't get me wrong, I've bought all the lord packs so far, enjoyed them, and gotten my money's worth. I don't think they're over priced. I will continue to buy them. But yeah, even as a fan, I find the practice a little slimy. And if you aren't specifically a fan or are on the fence, I can understand why the practice might be a slight deterrent from getting involved in the series.
    Well, I still don't understand. Capitalism, and especially neo-liberalism, is anti-consumer by design. The point is maximizing profits at the expense of consumers right to the point profits would go down because they just stop buying. I mean, you can have a problem with the whole system (I do), but as far as it goes CA cutting a unit to sell it later is so irrelevant that there is no point in calling it "anti-consumer" specifically. I mean, tobacco companies are known to have bribed researchers in order to lie about lung cancer, *that's* more anti-consumer than usual.
  • uriakuriak Posts: 2,703Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    What is the meaning of "cutting" unless you mean the sacrosant TT lists ?

    It's built from the ground up, VG sellers know there are real psychological barriers to make people pay upfront too much but games do cost more than before to there is that long trail of additional content. Obviously if TW sold more we could have more content, but can't know whether the peak players for this genre is reached or if a different design/marketing could make it even more of a best seller. (and if TW would solf twice as much there would a good chance for larger teams)

    Anyway, I've discussed with other people and yes the "TW is DLC hell" feeling is real. And I bet it's a perception that makes CA much more worried than any Jabberslythe tears. Many games are FTP or use more incremental models. Games are fighting for attention. Those are interesting times...
  • VoxofWarVoxofWar Member Posts: 127Registered Users
    Personally, I think the industry has a hand in this “freeloader, DLC should be in base game or free“ mentality. To some degree...

    Games get so cheap so quickly nowadays. Sales, discounts, another sale, weeks after release. Great for us. But it cheapens also the value of games in the eyes of many ...

    People want their games fast, cheap, and with loads of content. They get it, but they might lose a feel of what that product is worth.

    Digital distribution adds to this. Why is this so expensive, its just a bitlot of bytes. Nothing to grab and feel. I am sure lots of younget people have no idea what games, or music, are worth as products. Combine that with entitlement ...hm...

    Also many see modders doing amazing stuff...and think creating original content from scratch is just as easy ... modders get all the praise, and CA or Bethesda get complaints that they dont do what modders do .... to hell with financial risks, market and running costs be damned
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    uriak said:

    What is the meaning of "cutting" unless you mean the sacrosant TT lists ?

    It's built from the ground up, VG sellers know there are real psychological barriers to make people pay upfront too much but games do cost more than before to there is that long trail of additional content. Obviously if TW sold more we could have more content, but can't know whether the peak players for this genre is reached or if a different design/marketing could make it even more of a best seller. (and if TW would solf twice as much there would a good chance for larger teams)

    Anyway, I've discussed with other people and yes the "TW is DLC hell" feeling is real. And I bet it's a perception that makes CA much more worried than any Jabberslythe tears. Many games are FTP or use more incremental models. Games are fighting for attention. Those are interesting times...

    I don't really think those are possible customers to begin with. It's really the same mechanism as piracy. Most pirates just want to play for free, there is no point in appeasing them, they would never buy a game. DLC haters just hate DLC on principle. The very word.
  • RewanRewan Senior Member Posts: 756Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    Why would Alarielle want to confederate with a player who didn't buy her DLC?


    That's a dull argument and you know it. Again, she can go pout in a corner for all I care, forcing me - the player that don't own the DLC - to throw down the EXTERMINATUS Warhammer40Kstyle on her in order to unite the HE island is just dumb.
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 8,865Registered Users
    Exarch said:

    I've been buying the DLC in real time, but not Queen and the Crone. As I have all game 1 and the DLC, and have only just started playing MP, I am fine with not playing as elves.

    But the lord packs look more and more like cut content. If you compare what you get for a dlc race pack vs an original game race, the DLC race is 'complete' with 4 lords, unique mechanics and RoR.

    If you include the FLC, HE and DE as base races have three lords, incomplete rosters and no RoR. Only with Q&C are they on a par with the race packs.

    This means, in MP especially, the game ks designed so that you have to buy DLC, or play the game at a disadvantage, even if you only use one race, which I find pretty shabby.

    In SP it is less bad, as you can have a fun campaign without the lord pack units, and roster holes are not as important ans in PvP.

    Well incomplete rosters seems to be the right term, rather than "cut content". The DLC races should be more complete from the get go because they are much less likely to get extra content than the base races. Also the base game do not focus on a single race, but it have 4 races, also the price of the base game is cheaper than the price of buying 4 race DLCs, but ya it's better to not play a base race in multiplayer unless you have it's lord DLC, because a player with a lord DLC have a clear advantage over a player who play with a base race without it's lord DLC.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • John_KimbleJohn_Kimble Posts: 186Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    So now we're complaining that someone who chose to not buy QatC (fair) can't confederate with the main content sold withing that DLC? What?
    How is that even an argument?

    How would that be remotely fair to the people who actually spent money, bougth the DLC and supported CA?

    Why do it if a random Joe could simply launch a Tyrion campaign, play for 20 turns befriending Avelorn and then just simply confederate her (which takes no effort whatsoever), and play with her faction? And saying "hey i promise i would instantly disband her and not play with her i swear" doesn't sound like a good excuse at all.

    Not following you here sorry. It's not surprising at all if CA chose to add this supposed "paywall" in WH2. I don't think they quite enjoy giving DLC's out for free yet.

    Also, we should be thankful that they actually bother to add the DLC content to everyone's game in the form of AI factions one can fight with/against.
    Most developers don't even do that. You don't have the DLC? Then you can't even see it in your game.

    Though as far as i seem to understand, you would much prefer not having the DLC appear at all in your game if you don't own it. So you could play freely without any sort of "paywall" on content you haven't payed for. Correct?

  • RewanRewan Senior Member Posts: 756Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    Except you don't play with "her faction".

    Technically the only thing confederation with her would do is give you access to the LL (hence the skin and the skilltree), you can't recruit the units in the pack, you can't build the handmaidens grove.

    AND THEN AGAIN.
    CA. Can. Just. Disband. Her. When. You. Do. It.. That's my frigging point, I don't want to be limited by the DLC and I sure as heck understand why old Billies would not want poor people to touch Alarielle.

    And before you say "it's not possible". Considering - for the third time - CA does demolish building you're not able to access after a confederation well, jokes on you it seems to be possible.
  • ExarchExarch Posts: 413Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    @uriak @VoxofWar

    I agree that the economics of up front game costs is what is drives the cost of the main faction lord/units to dlc instead of the main games.

    @Xenos7

    I don't think all dlc is bad, and tw doesn't have the worst dlc policy; I like the race packs and happily buy them on release if they keep up the standard, and lord packs have fairly minimal effect on the single player experience.

    But the MP aspect of lord packs is problematic, and just because I like the games and the quality of the content is good, it doesn't stop it being unethical to devalue paid for content with dlc.

    Personally, can I do much about this? Not a lot! Not buying lord packs unless they are heavily discounted is pretty much it!

    @Tayvar

    But if you're not playing a base game faction on MP, you have to pay for the dlc faction, so they have you coming and going!

    @Rewan

    I agree, they should fix it so you can confed with Avalorn and the dlc factions, disbanding and destroying (or converting) LP units and buildings.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 3,986Registered Users
    Rewan said:

    Except you don't play with "her faction".

    Technically the only thing confederation with her would do is give you access to the LL (hence the skin and the skilltree), you can't recruit the units in the pack, you can't build the handmaidens grove.

    AND THEN AGAIN.
    CA. Can. Just. Disband. Her. When. You. Do. It.. That's my frigging point, I don't want to be limited by the DLC and I sure as heck understand why old Billies would not want poor people to touch Alarielle.

    And before you say "it's not possible". Considering - for the third time - CA does demolish building you're not able to access after a confederation well, jokes on you it seems to be possible.

    I don't think it's quite that easy. She's a LL, so disbanding her would mean you have to recruit another lord in her place (because armies can't exist without a leader). And actually, by normal rules disbanding her would put her back in your lord pool, so the code needs to be altered.

    Now, is that impossible? No, absolutely not, it probably is a (complex) mod-level tweak. But surely it's not as easy as simply disabling the option.
  • VessingerVessinger Senior Member Posts: 936Registered Users
    While I miss the days when DLC wasn't a thing and games got expansions loaded with enough content to practically be called a new game, we're firmly entrenched in the Age of the DLC and no matter what we do there's likely no going back.

    That said, CA is by far and away the least offender in the whole paywall issue. Paradox is miles worse, to the extent it's not even comparable. The obnoxious amount of DLC and nickel and diming they do for games like EU IV is a whole other level. EA is a close 2nd.

    There are plenty of legitimate complaints you can have with CA but this just sounds like a bunch of malcontents with entitlement issues.
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 8,865Registered Users
    Rewan said:

    Why would Alarielle want to confederate with a player who didn't buy her DLC?


    That's a dull argument and you know it. Again, she can go pout in a corner for all I care, forcing me - the player that don't own the DLC - to throw down the EXTERMINATUS Warhammer40Kstyle on her in order to unite the HE island is just dumb.
    It's little limiting, but it's also makes sense if Alarielle confederate only with players that buy her DLC.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • MacFierceMacFierce Posts: 9Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    I mean look, you get what you pay for. TWW is an incredibly polished product. I own both games and every single DLC. But there is plenty to do just in the base TWW1 for months on end without any additional content. Its on sale often. Ditto to the DLC. I didn't buy everything all at once.

    If you're even a little bit savvy you can eventually get the entire game and at a significant discount. Or, if you need to have it now, you gotta pay up.

    I came to the party a bit late about half-way through TWW1's life cycle. Since that time i've paced myself, purchased the stuff i know i wanted immediately on release date, and waited for the rest. I honestly dont think i paid full price for any of it aside from the base TWW2 game. Even the vampire coast was 10% off if you pre-order. And if you're posting on this forum, chances are you like the game enough that you can rest assured in pre-ordering future DLC.

    You can do the same too!
  • NyxilisNyxilis Posts: 1,802Registered Users
    Zelnik said:

    So it seems that there are two opinions in this board, and I will try to boil them down to the essence of their arguments.


    Argument 1: This game and all content that CA creates is art, and we should be happy to pay money for said art. Criticisms can be ignored if unsightly because ultimately, we have no bearing on what is made or added into this game. FLC are like those wonderful extra strokes on a canvas that add to the whole, and since they don't cost anything to the consumer, being critical of them is forbidden.

    Argument 2: All criticisms should be regarded in some measure because this game is a product on a market, and ignoring the customer reviews is done at their own peril. The cash of the consumer is ultimately what pays the bills. CA acting political, or deliberately restorationist with history after they declared an interest in being accurate is just another way for them to alienate their consumer base.



    Reality shows that Argument 2 is more realistic. People can make platitudes about how CA is like Picasso, and doesn't have to make anything for us, but they are selling a product in an extremely competitive market. Like in any market, the consumer buys based upon quality and content. If quality is lacking for any reason (accidental or deliberate) it will harm the sales of the product in direct proportion to it's cost. The whole of TWWH is NOT cheap to boot. It is a monstrously large game spread over two individual titles and multiple race DLC that shatters the normal $60 per game glass ceiling if you want to experience it in it's full glory. Just to play Mortal Empires costs 120 bucks, DLC for the first game is about 75 dollars, and DLC for the second game is just under 50 dollars so far. These games are NOT cheap.

    Let me shatter a little preconceived notion about FLC. These are not gifts from CA. They are ADVERTISING. They are incentives to get us to buy more of their product. Sure, you can try to play the game with FLC only, and only pay 60 bucks for it, but you would be playing a rather disjointed, husk of a game. remember that some of those FLC are for DLC races to boot.

    If CA wants to remain competitive, respecting and listening to it's consumer base, especially the ones who dropped the 200+ dollars for all of their content, is not only wise, but essential to their future business. If they take the mentality of "just don't buy it," they are falling into a trap that can lose them a LOT of money. No company should tell it's consumer "just don't buy it" because of the risk that they will actually agree with them.

    Most importantly of all, CA should not get political.

    So should they view the review bombing of their games with some sort of clarity and observation? Absolutely. Their fans are upset, and the more upset the customer gets, the less likely they will patronize your game. Despite popular belief, there are other video games out there.

    Should they regard consumer criticisms of their FLC seriously? Yes. FLC are advertising for their game, essentially content designed to get people to purchase the game, because stastically, the moment someone buys the game, they will buy the rest of it shortly thereafter. We need to be just as critical of FLC as DLC, especially if the content makes no sense whatsoever (like Fellheart not being able to man his own Ark. Seriously, shame on CA for that one)



    That is not the two sides of the argument, just twisting the words of the various sides into pointless simplicity designed to support your statements afterwards.
  • MacFierceMacFierce Posts: 9Registered Users
    At the end of the day there are so many games out there that charge a AAA price that don't deliver. Just look at Fallout 76 or Mass Effect Andromeda. Even revered series like Assassin's Creed have had duds (though the last two or three have been great).

    This is a high quality game that does deliver hundreds of hours of entertainment. For the price of taking you and a date to a movie you get weeks of fun stuff to do with these new race DLCs. And you don't even have to pay $5.50 for a soda and $8.50 for popcorn if you want a snack while you play...

    I can (and sometimes do) pay more for a steak than one of these race DLC packs. A steak! It's delicious, but gone in 30 minutes.

    The game is most definitely expensive as games go but it's good. I'd rather spend full AAA money on a high quality product than get a piece of junk game for $30 (though there are many very good games at that price too tbh).

    No one is forcing anyone to buy this game. If you want to have a cube steak or chuck roast for dinner you're welcomed to do so. If i'm eating steak though, i'll have the porterhouse.
Sign In or Register to comment.