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

TWW2 - Old World DLC. TWW3 and campaign packs in future.

2»

Comments

  • Xenos7Xenos7 Posts: 5,105Registered Users

    Doesn't really matter if they said it. I don't see how it is ethical to sell DLC that requires another game to be usable, and neither will the casual players.

    This issue will be even worse in game 3 as new players will realize they need to buy two more games to get the combined map. This makes the combined map accessible to a possibly small number of people, which isn't good for long term support either.

    I think the best way to handle it is to make the combined map accessible to all players, and then let them use the DLC and lords they own on it. That means if there's a high elf vs orc cross-game pack, the two lords you get will be usable on the campaign map. But if you want the other orc lords you will need to own game 1.

    This is one point I've never understood. Why do you think a player who pays for one game should get a map that encompasses 2 or 3? If I paid for the Paradox DLC (£7.99!) that allows you to carry on a game between games I wouldn't expect to get a £34.99 game after paying £7.99, so I certainly wouldn't expect 1 or 2 AAA titles for free.

    The ME campaign is what people wanted, I hated the fact that new DLC didn't always add to the original title, it's now sorted.
    I never said you get the second or first title for free. I said the map should be accessible to all players. The cost of game 1 is not just the map, it is also the factions. Let game 2 players access game 2 factions on mortal empires. Then, bring the possibility of cross game DLC that people who buy it can actually use. It's unethical to sell content that may not even be usable, which is obviously why they have not done it.

    Clearly comprehension is missing within this community.
    Why the map? There is no need.

    Let's say there is a Grom vs Eltharion DLC for game 2. You don't own game 1: you get Grom with his starting position on the Vortex map, his special units and the basic orc roster. No Grimgor, no Skarsnik, no RoR, no squigs. Solved. If people like the race, then they're going to buy all the other stuff.
  • Cookie35641Cookie35641 Junior Member Posts: 11Registered Users
    edited April 15
    @ConstantineZAyn

    These numbers are for concurrent players, it´s not the total number of active players.

    If you look at steamdb.info you´d also notice that the first game averaged something around 8.000 - 15.000 concurrent Players outside of DLC/FLC releases (and that these numbers plummeted after TWW2s release). So i dare say the current numbers for TWW2 look pretty healthy.

    Honestly, if you want to attack other users about using "fake numbers", maybe you should at least try to get your own facts straight.
  • NyxilisNyxilis Posts: 3,145Registered Users

    Nyxilis said:

    The peak player-base for TWW2 was 70,000 players. That is only 7% of a million. The population floats at around 25,000 players. 2.5% of a million. With such a small population, the statement of "millions of customers" is certainly bold and exaggerated, when most of them are just fans who bought game 1 and game 2. Great.

    Of course, this is completely irrelevant to the post or the things I was talking about earlier. It is certainly entertaining how they will nitpick my arguments to whatever suits them, ignoring the rest. It becomes clear why CA is more active on Reddit than their own forums.


    Nyxilis said:

    Doesn't really matter if they said it. I don't see how it is ethical to sell DLC that requires another game to be usable, and neither will the casual players.

    This issue will be even worse in game 3 as new players will realize they need to buy two more games to get the combined map. This makes the combined map accessible to a possibly small number of people, which isn't good for long term support either.

    I think the best way to handle it is to make the combined map accessible to all players, and then let them use the DLC and lords they own on it. That means if there's a high elf vs orc cross-game pack, the two lords you get will be usable on the campaign map. But if you want the other orc lords you will need to own game 1.

    This is one point I've never understood. Why do you think a player who pays for one game should get a map that encompasses 2 or 3? If I paid for the Paradox DLC (£7.99!) that allows you to carry on a game between games I wouldn't expect to get a £34.99 game after paying £7.99, so I certainly wouldn't expect 1 or 2 AAA titles for free.

    The ME campaign is what people wanted, I hated the fact that new DLC didn't always add to the original title, it's now sorted.
    I never said you get the second or first title for free. I said the map should be accessible to all players. The cost of game 1 is not just the map, it is also the factions. Let game 2 players access game 2 factions on mortal empires. Then, bring the possibility of cross game DLC that people who buy it can actually use. It's unethical to sell content that may not even be usable, which is obviously why they have not done it.

    Clearly comprehension is missing within this community.
    They didn't sell unusable content. The ME map is free and the map itself, the elven, Skaven, LM cities, models are paid for via game 2. The entitlement on this thread is painful to watch. If you buy game 1 you can fight but not play the DLC units because they are tied to game 1. The same with game 2, you can fight their DLC units, but, if you didn't pay for a particular games commodities then why do you think CA are obliged to hand them over?

    At no point did I ever expect CA to give the full map for only partial owners.

    Clearly the entitlement is in abundance on this thread.
    By unusable content I'm referring to potential cross-game DLC that people are suggesting. The only thing that's painful to watch is your inability to comprehend.

    There's no entitlement on this thread as I own both games and all DLC (except vampire coast, which was a terrible addition to the game).
    Oh of course not.. there's no way they're going to release a cross-pack for the millions of customers who own both games.. Ok I admit, I got it wrong how you're wrong; but as it turns out - you're wrong. Despite there being a huge market for people who already own both games you don't think CA would release DLC that entices someone to buy game 1 or 2? Especially while the older one is on offer? You do realise that in the past CA advertised R2 with videos of paid DLC that wasn't included in the game, right? With this in mind do you really think selling a cross game DLC is below them? Naïve.

    A terrible addition that you've never played? Well, may be you could write to see and demand a bespoke version with everything in that you specifically want.
    Where did you get the statistic that millions of people own TWW2 and TWW1?

    That bespoke version being a modified game with vampire coast nuked and adjusted into nothing more than a minor nuisance - as it should be.
    Sales for both games are in the millions. Are you seriously going to try and convince us that a whole nothing million or even half million of players ignored game one and then got into two alone? That's nonsense.

    I'd argue that the overwhelming majority of players that bought game two day one already owned game one. Because they were already fans of the series.

    Then I'd argue that slim minority who only owned game 2 has narrowed considerably now that we've had multiple sales with game 1 being $15 bucks.
    I don't need to convince you of anything, because I don't throw around estimates, fake statistics, and arguments of "overwhelming majority" when we really don't know anything concrete. If TWW2 sold a million copies, and, say, 5% of its playerbase don't own game 1, that means there are potentially 50,000 people that can be ripped off wih a DLC they can't use. CA knows this which is why there is no cross game DLC.

    Nothing is going to change the fact that it is an unethical practice to sell DLC in a game that requires another game to be usable. The end.
    There are no fake estimates. The game sold millions of copies. And you're claiming they should make DLC around 5% who can't be asked to spend fifteen bucks.

    Nothing fake about it, it's just terrible to hold yourself to.
    Considering that game 2's population floats at around 25000 players that means only 0.5-2.5% of the owners still play it regardless of how many millions bought the game, and we have no numbers on how many people own all the content or own both games. We don't have these statistics, so all of your arguments are baseless.

    Game 1 doesn't cost 15 bucks. It is priced as a full game. I've already said this before but I'm going in circles. I'm sure communication with a brick wall would go better.

    It is unethical to sell DLC that requires another game to be usable. Exit the echo-chamber, go for a walk, then come back when you figure that out.
    A lack of understanding what active players are. I play Stellaris, I play Overwatch, and I play Total War. I do not play nothing but Total War. Same with everyone else, people come and go based on mood and time. But I do know that more people by a vast amount own both games than don't own either. You're still having to assert that millions of different people bought game one and then didn't buy game to. That's just not realistic by any measurement. Majority who own one, own two.

    Game 1 is on sale routinely on Steam and other vendors for $15 bucks. I've said this in this very thread. Start reading the words. You don't even need much patience since there is usually a sale running somewhere to grab it for that amount. If you buy it full price right now then you're simply overpaying.

    And don't accuse me of being in an echo chamber when you talk the same spiel. It's just an attempt to devalue the other side without presenting an actual point. To which your math does not add up, your points do not add up, and in the end it sets up the majority of players to not get what they want.

    So I'll just leave it like this, I'll happily use my wallet to get those things and leave you in the unethical dust as will the majority of the player base and this forum that openly ask for cross game DLC lord packs every time the DLC predictions come up.
  • uriakuriak Posts: 3,421Registered Users
    edited April 15
    I've been worried about the DLC conundrum for long. The cross content is both something

    - that many players would want if given the chance
    - that's a nightmare to feature because of ownership.

    In an ideal world the simplest solution would be this :

    Make game 3 combined campaign accessible to all game 3 owners. Factions are locked by ownership of older games and DLC. So any DLC geared toward any geographical position can be used by a game 3 owner.
    maybe make the first 4 OW factions part of game 3. They were exclusive to a game that will be years old by the point. Give game 1 owners a rebate on game 3.

    There, now they can pump content without being worried about most cross game ownership.Especially new Imperial/GS content.

    Alas, I'm afraid this won't happen, because they will consider game 1 as a possible thing to buy, even if it's a DLC content at this point. And if they didn't, some people would express outrage if other people would enjoy older stuff without having bought game 1. It's not as if buying game one had the advantage of letting us play TWW for a while...

    Now the pessimistic possibility is they don't want to touch this hazard and we end up only with free content for older factions, with a free content level of new stuff (no new models, limited mechanics, and lords)

    --

    About faction mechanics : I don't know what new level of campaign rules they plan this time. Hopefully they will consider putting more stuff to a new standard before rolling out a combined campaign. There is no rush. Unfortunately, cross play will stay a huge commercial argument, so they will be tempted to repeat the procedure of game 2, with similar results.
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Posts: 1,480Registered Users
    Mortal Empires is not 'free' and the second CA got people to start believing that, they had done a bait and switch on us.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Posts: 4,460Registered Users

    Mortal Empires is not 'free' and the second CA got people to start believing that, they had done a bait and switch on us.

    They didn't give us a map filled with all the units and features of 3 separate games for free? Crazy..
Sign In or Register to comment.