Why doesn't Sega/CA create a larger DLC team? the DLC is literally printing them insane money.

Bobsyourankle#7897

Different teams taking different programming approaches could cause issues with the stability of the game engine. More is not always better.

Whitewolf7762#6480

There’s a lot that goes into it. Having two separate teams might cause a tone difference in the two dlcs in question. Also the managing of those two teams would complicate things as well. If you want the same quality you’re probably going to want to stick with the team that has been doing it and sacrifice for the time that it needs.

ArecBalrin#2350

The following figures are estimates.

Call of The Beastmen was the highest-selling DLC of the Total War series overall. It currently has an upper estimate of ~134k owners on Steam. https://steamdb.info/app/404012/charts/

Rise of The Tomb Kings is one of the best-received DLC of the Warhammer games. It currently has an upper estimate of ~124k owners on Steam. https://steamdb.info/app/617870/charts/

The Silence & The Fury was the final DLC for WH2. It currently has an upper estimate of ~51k owners on Steam. https://steamdb.info/app/1556110/charts/

The Champions of Chaos DLC is the first 'proper' DLC release for WH3. It currently has an upper estimate of ~45.3k owners on Steam.


WH1 sold around ~2.6 million units close to its release. Its average upper estimate of Steam owners is currently ~3.3 million. https://steamdb.info/app/364360/charts/

WH1's best-selling DLC(Beastmen) only monetised from ~4% of those eligible to purchase it. Despite 'listening to player feedback' and changing the offering of DLC more towards Legendary Lord characters, the updated model that happens to be very favourable to CA in terms of price:content hasn't been selling better than Call of The Beastmen.

WH2 sold ~1 million less than WH1 did close to its release. Only later did it recover and peak years after. Its average upper estimate is currently ~5.4 million owners on Steam. https://steamdb.info/app/594570/charts/


WH2's best-selling DLC(Tomb Kings) only monetised from ~2.3% of those eligible to purchase it. This game was the DLC powerhouse of the entire Total War series, not just WH, and this was its best DLC by sales.

WH3 released simultaneously on Steam and non-Steam platforms. It's not known how this affects figures, though educated guesses can be made because DLC is not cross-platform compatible and nor are combined campaigns. Its average upper estimates for Steam owners is ~2.3 million.

Figures are not yet available for Chaos Dwarfs DLC and won't be reliable for some months after that releases. For the Chaos Champions DLC, the effective monetisation of the Steam audience is ~1.9%.

I've got nowhere trying to ever explain anything. So decide for yourselves what any of this means, if anything.

Démon#5111

I deleted the game today. I have played over 2000 hours WH2-WH3. My motivation is 0% now.
It would be enough if they took care of bugs and various problems in the game. The game needs to be playable and not constantly adding something to a broken game.
They can only add more things after the basic game is completely fixed. *facepalm* No need DLC now. IE is in terrible shape

Darksteel83#1113

Démon#5111 said:

I deleted the game today. I have played over 2000 hours WH2-WH3. My motivation is 0% now.
It would be enough if they took care of bugs and various problems in the game. The game needs to be playable and not constantly adding something to a broken game.
They can only add more things after the basic game is completely fixed. *facepalm* No need DLC now. IE is in terrible shape

Why do you think IE is in a terrible state? I can understand if you WH3 is not in a good state. But I don't understand it for IE alone.
As things as the settlement/siege rework effects all WH3 campaigns. So more then IE alone. Only one mono God also affects RoC and IE.

Itharus#3127

Captain_Rex#1635 said:

Cosmic_Lich#1188 said:

It might be the case that the DLC team doesn't need more people. To the point where it would have diminishing returns or overcomplicate the process. Too many cooks in the kitchen, as it were.

Edit: In a recent interview, it was revealed that the team started as 2 people, but now it's around 20 people.

There should be 2 teams working on different DLCs simultaneously.

That's not feasible. These DLCs alter the game a lot, both teams would have to coordinate and be on the same track. It'd be an absolute nightmare that would lead to WH2 Norsca level fiasco.

Mr_Finley7#4571

Every piece of potential dlc left unfinished is money left on the table. I’m assuming it’s GWs fault for not allowing CA to fill in blanks themselves, but they are going to lose money by not making Nippon, Ind, Khuresh, and Hobgoblins

pommiebastard#2027

Bobsyourankle#7897 said:

Different teams taking different programming approaches could cause issues with the stability of the game engine. More is not always better.

Yep, sticking more teams in parallel only works to improve throughput in something like the expected way if you can totally decouple what they're doing from each other.

If they are working on things that heavily overlap with each other (like, say, the linked systems of a large-scale, complex computer game), then the complexity of handling things goes up exponentially with the number of teams.

You can split the work functionally within a team to allow for some parallel working, but once you have folks from multiple teams editing or updating the same area/code/files, then managing simultaneous changes without drowning everything in clashes and bugs is challenging.

(I work in IT development/consulting)

dge1

Business discussion. Moved.