Europa Universalis IV announced

[Syt]

I did consider buying all DLC a form of subscription, but I think I don't trust PDX to run a subscription service. At the moment they have the luxury of releasing DLC when it's ready when they want.

In a sub based system, I'd think that people would expect content updates with a certain predictability.

CK2 was released 8 years ago. Steam informs me that the combined DLC is ~ €300.- (plus the game, I guess, which cost 40 at release).

A price like that (or EUR 5.- per month) would get more people to jump in and try it out (esp. if there's a free trial period), but you would also likely lose revenue from guys like me who buy every DLC out of a completionist drive but only play every once in a while.

[Tamas]

I'd also be worried a subscription service would push them even more toward catering to their map-painter-screw-history players, as player retention would become a big thing.


Then again, of course, it might work out.

[Josquius]

I think the issue is less about folk who have bought all the dlc and more as they say, sales of the base game are drying up due to the mountain of dlc.

Interesting to note eu4 with a bunch of dlc is on humble bundle at the moment.

[mongers]

Is EU IV a noticeable improvement on EUIII?

III didn't grab my attention so will this?

[Liep]

Is EU IV a noticeable improvement on EUIII?

III didn't grab my attention so will this?

Yes, if you're talking about EUIII without DLCs then EUIV is a much better game. Chinese New Year sale is on so it might be on sale.

[Josquius]

Or just humble bundle.
Worth getting for $15

[mongers]

Is EU IV a noticeable improvement on EUIII?

III didn't grab my attention so will this?

Yes, if you're talking about EUIII without DLCs then EUIV is a much better game. Chinese New Year sale is on so it might be on sale.

Thanks Leip, I'll get it.

But I might not have much time to play it.

[crazy canuck]

I enjoyed IV more before they introduced most of the current mechanics.  I stopped playing after getting frustrated with the need to micro manage states.  I think I read in this thread that those are going to be removed?

[garbon]

I enjoyed IV more before they introduced most of the current mechanics.  I stopped playing after getting frustrated with the need to micro manage states.  I think I read in this thread that those are going to be removed?

Yeah, I feel like you and I discussed that positive change but it doesn't appear to have been in this thread.

[DGuller]

I think moving away from DLC model is worth a shot.  It really sucks to have 2048 versions of the game out there, and I feel like the DLC model is putting more pressure on the developers to come up with something new rather than refine what's already in the game but not working well.

[Josquius]

Yeah, half arsed feature bloat is a definite problem.  To sell dlc you've always got to be promising the next big thing. Fixes just don't cut it.

[Barrister]

I think moving away from DLC model is worth a shot.  It really sucks to have 2048 versions of the game out there, and I feel like the DLC model is putting more pressure on the developers to come up with something new rather than refine what's already in the game but not working well.

A subscription model would definitely help with trying to coordinate 2048 different versions of the game, but it isn't going to do anything to prevent feature bloat - they have to keep giving you reasons to keep your subscription active.

[garbon]

I think moving away from DLC model is worth a shot.  It really sucks to have 2048 versions of the game out there, and I feel like the DLC model is putting more pressure on the developers to come up with something new rather than refine what's already in the game but not working well.

A subscription model would definitely help with trying to coordinate 2048 different versions of the game, but it isn't going to do anything to prevent feature bloat - they have to keep giving you reasons to keep your subscription active.

Exactly.

But then recent paradox games don't really seem for me so I'm perhaps not the target audience.

[DGuller]

I see the point, but I still disagree.  Subscription model would require regular updates, I agree with that, but I think it would have less of a requirement to add something new.  It's hard to market DLC as something that fixes what was broken with the game before, it has to be adding some new dimension to the game, but there is no such pressure with subscription.  You just have publish regular upgrades, and developers have some leeway to choose which upgrades would be adding content and which ones would be fixing or streamlining the game.  Right now changes that make the game better have to be packaged with additions to the game that usually make the game worse, at least in HOI4.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I think moving away from DLC model is worth a shot.  It really sucks to have 2048 versions of the game out there, and I feel like the DLC model is putting more pressure on the developers to come up with something new rather than refine what's already in the game but not working well.

A subscription model would definitely help with trying to coordinate 2048 different versions of the game, but it isn't going to do anything to prevent feature bloat - they have to keep giving you reasons to keep your subscription active.

a subscription would not -depending on what the subscription contains though- make the game cheaper. And let one of the complaints with all the DLC levelled at Paradox be moneygrubbing...