Europa Universalis IV announced

[Tamas]

With a subscription-based model there would be far more DLCs, not less. People would have to feel like they are getting something for their subscription.

I think an annual pass kind of deal would fit their games better.

[Syt]

Problem is I don't see them handling a release cycle like, say, Path of Exile, that has substantial new mechanics every quarter with one massive change once a year.

[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.

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...

I'd personally be happy to pay more in return for a better product.  For me, then problem with DLCs is that they make the game increasingly shittier. 

One thing that modders cannot replace is the single vision of a game designer who knows what he envisioned, and keeps things in balance from many perspectives.  This is why I rarely mod my game, the end product is almost never better than the original.  DLCs turn game designers into modders with "more, more, more" mentality.

[Tamas]

DLCs turn game designers into modders with "more, more, more" mentality.

That's a good point, although in can work for a while. It would be just good to stop at some point and say "alright, this is the game". Why would they do it if they keep making money, though?

Mods on the other hand must be judged individually. I really detest mods cropping up in a matter of days for strategy games like Total War for example, and then subsequently praised just because they are different than vanilla.

However, things like HIP (and formerly CK2+) do make their games much better. Having a better vision than "more is better" sure helps in that, though.

[garbon]

I've seen no evidence, particularly with switching leads, that P'dox is able to follow a single vision.

Imperator suffered from a singular vision that was deeply flawed.

[Tamas]

I've seen no evidence, particularly with switching leads, that P'dox is able to follow a single vision.

Imperator suffered from a singular vision that was deeply flawed.

In hindsight, you could see what was coming when Johan was on live preview streams with one of their community guys. The guy would regularly try to make Johan pause to reflect on simulation values, historical references to what was happening, but Johan was WAY too busy zerg-rushing stuff to pay any heed.  Explains the game SO much.

I think he had a very clear idea of what game he wants to see and he managed to keep to that, it's just that it happened to disagree with what people expected.

[garbon]

Yes really an issue where a singular vision was problematic so separate issue from their earlier games.

[mongers]

Well I bought it, didn't go for the full DLC content, as was aiming to play just the base game.

As it was when I downloaded, it automatically added to the install the four or five DLC it came with, I wasn't given any option. 

edit:
so I'm not to sure how much chrome I'm now playing with; the patch is the manchu one, which I assume is a recent one.

Oh, I quite like the game, might well play it a bit.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah, the EU concept remains one of my all time favs.  Just hate all the feature bloat.

[Valmy]

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.

Yeah that is the thing. Options like subscription services always end up impacting the game design so are not really options, just like "optional" DLCs and micro-transactions.

So I was thinking about getting EUIV at some point and man...to buy the game costs $264 

But I just could not justify a sub, I tend to play these kinds of games for years with many months often between sessions. So basically this game in not practical to purchase for me.

[mongers]

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.

Yeah that is the thing. Options like subscription services always end up impacting the game design so are not really options, just like "optional" DLCs and micro-transactions.

So I was thinking about getting EUIV at some point and man...to buy the game costs $264 

But I just could not justify a sub, I tend to play these kinds of games for years with many months often between sessions. So basically this game in not practical to purchase for me.

Valmy you do know it's on humble bundle offer for the next few days, ends the 2nd Feb I think.

So you have the usual three tier offer starting at $1 and ending at $25 odd for the big bundle.

[Josephus]

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.

Yeah that is the thing. Options like subscription services always end up impacting the game design so are not really options, just like "optional" DLCs and micro-transactions.

So I was thinking about getting EUIV at some point and man...to buy the game costs $264 

But I just could not justify a sub, I tend to play these kinds of games for years with many months often between sessions. So basically this game in not practical to purchase for me.

But you don't really need all the DLCs. Maybe ask around which one or two are essential. The cool thing is that P'dox makes most of the major changes that come with the DLC free in the patch that accompanies it, anyways.

[Josquius]

Well I bought it, didn't go for the full DLC content, as was aiming to play just the base game.

As it was when I downloaded, it automatically added to the install the four or five DLC it came with, I wasn't given any option. 

edit:
so I'm not to sure how much chrome I'm now playing with; the patch is the manchu one, which I assume is a recent one.

Oh, I quite like the game, might well play it a bit.

Right click on the game in steams and there's an option for download options or some such where you can select/deselect which dlc to download.

[Valmy]

Valmy you do know it's on humble bundle offer for the next few days, ends the 2nd Feb I think.

So you have the usual three tier offer starting at $1 and ending at $25 odd for the big bundle.

Holy shit. Ok I will just get that then

[Zoupa]

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.

Yeah that is the thing. Options like subscription services always end up impacting the game design so are not really options, just like "optional" DLCs and micro-transactions.

So I was thinking about getting EUIV at some point and man...to buy the game costs $264 

But I just could not justify a sub, I tend to play these kinds of games for years with many months often between sessions. So basically this game in not practical to purchase for me.

But you don't really need all the DLCs. Maybe ask around which one or two are essential. The cool thing is that P'dox makes most of the major changes that come with the DLC free in the patch that accompanies it, anyways.

That's not really true. If you play with patch 1.9 (for example) but don't have the DLC that came with said patch, your gameplay will be worse than playing with patch 1.8 fow which you have the DLC.