Based upon reviews, EU4 DLC quality/price ratio isn't good anymore.

[Mad_House]

Common Sense and Cossacks, the two latest DLC releases by Paradox, have some pretty abysmal reviews, and on top of that their prices are some of the highest in their category. It's pretty clear customers aren't getting their bang for the buck.

It's my understanding that it has been somewhat excused by the development team as necessary based on the amount of work put into the expansions; problem is, a lot of people aren't seeing that much expansion, therefore, the judgment is that the expansions aren't worth the charge. Hence the low reviews for the later DLCs compared to the praise for older DLCs (i.e. Art of War or Wealth of Nations).

So unless Stockholm raised taxes on Paradox Entertainment to pay for Sweden's refugee crisis, I really don't see how the arguments can go on between members of this community. The latest DLC isn't the same quality as its predecessors. Bugs, as well, have been prevalent in recent releases. The team seems to be getting greedy, and public opinion outside of the circle of the devout reflects that.

Can members of the community speak out to Paradox more often about these issues? I don't want to see Paradox become another sell-out company, I was planning on passing their games down to my future children when I have them for the innovative thought provoking nature they spur on; I won't be doing that if it means paying into a corporate set-up that is making the world worse.

[Tyrendian89]

I'm not keen on the Cossacks DLC myself - there's just very little in there that appeals to me since I have no real interest in ever playing a Horde (I'm even ignoring the current Let's Plays from Arumba and Quill, which is saying something for me). Estates seem to need another little patch or two, and diplomacy works just fine without the new stuff. The real thing for me in 1.14 is the new RNW generator, and that's in the patch itself. So I'll hold off on getting Cossacks at least until a major sale, which probably isnt far away considering PDXs practices and the time of year.
Common Sense on the other hand had some good content even though the price was kinda steep...
Something many people forget when judging Paradox pricing though is that there are few companies out there that do as many deep discounts as Paradox. There's hardly a month when you can't find the entirety of their product lineup at least -50% somewhere on the interwebz. So one might almost consider the difference between full price and the -50% a kind of "greed tax" on those that HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE NEW FEATURES RIGHT NAO!!!!!, while those that don't need the new stuff quite as badly can pay much less. I'm not saying that's a particularly good strategy since it can alienate both newcomers that see the very very bloated list of DLCs without the deeper understanding that veterans have, and said veterans because they tend to be the ones that pay more.

[Miles]

The price diffrence between Cossacks and COP for example is $5. Between it and Wealth of Nations $10. Between it and CS is $5.

Are we really getting upset about $5-$10?

Also Steam reveiws are a horrible inaccurate metric for measuring reception. The top review for CS says that "development has made expansion virtually impossible". I mean really?

Besides if you really cared that much you would be posting on the forums devs actually read.

[InvictusLampada]

While I appreciate that a lot of consumers don't see 'what the difference is' and very rarely contemplate on the amount of work and manhours that are sometimes requires to change things that might seem simpler, I can't help but feel the problem lies more with a different attitude in gaming recently.

Remember years ago when there were expansions to games like Age of Empires that might have added in a couple of new campaigns/story missions and maybe a handful of factions? Those were priced in a very similar way to what Paradox is currently doing. And truth be told, they were a lot easier to spew out, for the most part the new factions with skin changes and altering a couple of numbers in the backend.

What you're getting with the Expansions for EU4 is an actual expansion and/or iteration on existing gameplay features and mechanics. You will also find that there is a lot of unadvertised 'fleshing out' of nations that people dont even think about. And most of this is done for free as part of the general patch.

What you're paying for is access to greater control over new features. The main feature locked behind the Common Sense pay-wall was the ability to manually develop provinces. This is something that half the time isn't actually necessary at all but gives you a little more freedom. There are a great number of these instances throughout the 6 expansions.

At the end of the day, you as the consumer have the option to not purchase the product. And in EU4 you can still play with the expansion features in a multiplayer game if the host is using them. And as ever, most of the changes are completely free. The only reason people are complaining more now, is that the price has increased from the previously, and quite frankly, low cost for such dedicated support for a game that is now 2 years old.

[Laladen]

Any "members of the community" that are "speaking out to Paradox" as you put it, are not representing the community. they would merely be representing your view point. Most people paid for the expansion or didn't , and launched the game and are playing it or not; and not on the forums here complaining.

If you disagree with their pricing model. Do not purchase it. Do you want us to care that you are not purchasing it? Okay? *Hugs* All better now?

[Miles Colenso Avebury]

I think it's about what you want for your game. Some people would love this expansion because it gives them more to do during peacetime along with a wealth of other things, while some others don't see the point to it and therefore don't like it.

If you don't like it....doesn't mean everyone else does

[Mad_House]

Publicado originalmente por Karkoff:

The price diffrence between Cossacks and COP for example is $5. Between it and Wealth of Nations $10. Between it and CS is $5.

Are we really getting upset about $5-$10?

Also Steam reveiws are a horrible inaccurate metric for measuring reception. The top review for CS says that "development has made expansion virtually impossible". I mean really?

Besides if you really cared that much you would be posting on the forums devs actually read.

I complain about price because it adds up to higher levels with multiple purchases, has become a trend in recent updates, and sets a precedent for the company to follow as a "low bar of standards" if this continues.

Publicado originalmente por Fedaykin:

Any "members of the community" that are "speaking out to Paradox" as you put it, are not representing the community. they would merely be representing your view point. Most people paid for the expansion or didn't , and launched the game and are playing it or not; and not on the forums here complaining.

If you disagree with their pricing model. Do not purchase it. Do you want us to care that you are not purchasing it? Okay? *Hugs* All better now?

My view point? My view point doesn't have anything to do with the situation I write about; the community experience has been reflecting in lower review scores for the latest DLC content. Do I have concerns about that? Yes, because I care about Paradox for what they produce, not because I blindly excuse their actions. But what does not weigh here are "feelings," sir, and your downright condescending and offensive commentary toward me does not help your case. I ask you to not respond to my thread further if you maintain a preference of smartas*ery over civility.

Publicado originalmente por GeneralFeldMarschall Balck:

I think it's about what you want for your game. Some people would love this expansion because it gives them more to do during peacetime along with a wealth of other things, while some others don't see the point to it and therefore don't like it.

If you don't like it....doesn't mean everyone else does

I made zero recommendations of personal wanting. This has nothing to do with a "what you want" regarding me. Attack the stance, not the poster, sir.

[Palmirinha do Hotdog]

Their last dev diary on the paradoxplaza forums actually explained exactly this. They have a model for pricing DLCs based on number and category of features(small, medium and big features). Here is it: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/eu4-dev-diary-december-3rd-2015.894626/

I personally have no problem with Common Sense. It is a good DLC IMO, and most of the complaints are due to how development makes conquest more expensive early game, forcing you to actually think and prioritize instead of just snowballing as soon the clock starts ticking. The Cossacks, however, has been pretty underwhelming so far. Estates don't really feel like they matter at all unless they get pissed, and the 25% autonomy floor for estate-owned provinces is horrible. What keeps me coming back to them is that they can essentially be milked for sweet monarch points in exchange for money if you play your cards hard and don't let their loyalty dip too low. The horde mechanics seem like fun, but I can only say for sure after I finish my current playthrough and actually start a game with GH.

[Miles Colenso Avebury]

Publicado originalmente por Surlaw:

Publicado originalmente por Karkoff:

The price diffrence between Cossacks and COP for example is $5. Between it and Wealth of Nations $10. Between it and CS is $5.

Are we really getting upset about $5-$10?

Also Steam reveiws are a horrible inaccurate metric for measuring reception. The top review for CS says that "development has made expansion virtually impossible". I mean really?

Besides if you really cared that much you would be posting on the forums devs actually read.

I complain about price because it adds up to higher levels with multiple purchases, has become a trend in recent updates, and sets a precedent for the company to follow as a "low bar of standards" if this continues.

Publicado originalmente por Fedaykin:

Any "members of the community" that are "speaking out to Paradox" as you put it, are not representing the community. they would merely be representing your view point. Most people paid for the expansion or didn't , and launched the game and are playing it or not; and not on the forums here complaining.

If you disagree with their pricing model. Do not purchase it. Do you want us to care that you are not purchasing it? Okay? *Hugs* All better now?

My view point? My view point doesn't have anything to do with the situation I write about; the community experience has been reflecting in lower review scores for the latest DLC content. Do I have concerns about that? Yes, because I care about Paradox for what they produce, not because I blindly excuse their actions. But what does not weigh here are "feelings," sir, and your downright condescending and offensive commentary toward me does not help your case. I ask you to not respond to my thread further if you maintain a preference of smartas*ery over civility.

Publicado originalmente por GeneralFeldMarschall Balck:

I think it's about what you want for your game. Some people would love this expansion because it gives them more to do during peacetime along with a wealth of other things, while some others don't see the point to it and therefore don't like it.

If you don't like it....doesn't mean everyone else does

I made zero recommendations of personal wanting. This has nothing to do with a "what you want" regarding me. Attack the stance, not the poster, sir.

I don't think civility is your forte around here, with the amount of aggressive "I'm right you're wrong" attitude I'm feeling from you. I was just making clear that you seemed to not like the feature for price ratio (Yes, /quality)

Secondly, When I said "What you want" I was talking in general terms of the userbase. I should have used the phrase "What the user wants" and perhaps I would have been more clear. Wasn't referring to you since as you said, you never gave recommendations to what you want.

I wasn't attacking you, and if you feel I was....then perhaps read what I meant to say. And the phrase "If you don't like it doesn't mean nobody else does" was by no means an attack on you. Just a statement that some people like certain features while others despise it perhaps.

[Mad_House]

Publicado originalmente por GeneralFeldMarschall Balck:

Publicado originalmente por Surlaw:

I complain about price because it adds up to higher levels with multiple purchases, has become a trend in recent updates, and sets a precedent for the company to follow as a "low bar of standards" if this continues.



My view point? My view point doesn't have anything to do with the situation I write about; the community experience has been reflecting in lower review scores for the latest DLC content. Do I have concerns about that? Yes, because I care about Paradox for what they produce, not because I blindly excuse their actions. But what does not weigh here are "feelings," sir, and your downright condescending and offensive commentary toward me does not help your case. I ask you to not respond to my thread further if you maintain a preference of smartas*ery over civility.



I made zero recommendations of personal wanting. This has nothing to do with a "what you want" regarding me. Attack the stance, not the poster, sir.

I don't think civility is your forte around here, with the amount of aggressive "I'm right you're wrong" attitude I'm feeling from you. I was just making clear that you seemed to not like the feature for price ratio (Yes, /quality)

Secondly, When I said "What you want" I was talking in general terms of the userbase. I should have used the phrase "What the user wants" and perhaps I would have been more clear. Wasn't referring to you since as you said, you never gave recommendations to what you want.

I wasn't attacking you, and if you feel I was....then perhaps read what I meant to say. And the phrase "If you don't like it doesn't mean nobody else does" was by no means an attack on you. Just a statement that some people like certain features while others despise it perhaps.

I do ask you to check your feelings sir. There was not any mention of any "right vs. wrong" nor do my posts conduct such a sentiment.

Thank you for the correction of the "what you want" statement, but it's best to throw it out all-together. It has nothing to do with what I want, but rather with the economic justifications of the company behind the game that were so negatively received that it had to be explained in the Paradox forums by Wiz.

I wouldn't have considered the "if you don't like it," statement an attack, except for the fact that I never stated that I dislike, despise, or criticize any features of their game, only that the company has changed their DLC policies to deliver less bang for the buck, and the user reviews for the past two major expansions have reflected such distaste in the value.

[Felicity]

While I don't particularly think the dlc is great especially not for the price, I feel like the reason behind the reviews being poor is that most people are going to review the base game, not the DLC. The few people who dislike the dlc are going to go review it, while people who still like the game/don't care aren't going to post a positive one especially if they already posted a positive review of EU4.

This is totally separate from my opinion of the dlc itself, but I think that's a good explanation.

[Felicity]

Publicado originalmente por Ultrix Prime:

Publicado originalmente por Ace♡:

While I don't particularly think the dlc is great especially not for the price, I feel like the reason behind the reviews being poor is that most people are going to review the base game, not the DLC. The few people who dislike the dlc are going to go review it, while people who still like the game/don't care aren't going to post a positive one especially if they already posted a positive review of EU4.

This is totally separate from my opinion of the dlc itself, but I think that's a good explanation.

Customers that own the game play close attention to the DLCs because the game is designed to be balanced around owning them in my experience.

So quite to the contrary, for every pro versus anti DLC faction that arises both sides tend to care a great deal and are highly vocal.

There is a lot of passion toward this game and its DLCs by its customers of every stripe.

I sure don't review DLC.

So let's look at some numbers:

13,550 reviews for EU4 itself, 92% positive

100 reviews for cossacks, 52%

32 reviews for CoP, 75%

116 reviews fro art of war, 88%

311 reviews for common sense, 55%

so... no?

[Finkledinkle]

I've enjoyed all the DLC tbh. Granted I didn't pay full price for all of it but I don't think I've ever been dissapointed with the features added, excluding bugs of course. If you think Paradox are bad with DLC just look at Creative Assembly. Steam reviews probably aren't a great way to measure customer satisfaction either. I alwyas look at the ngeatves at lot of the time it's things like 'this game is too diffuclt now' or 'oh look, more features that introduce more bugs.' Despite reading a few reviews before buying anything, I usually just make up my own mind. Unless it's blatantly awful and every reveiw says so.

[Exarch_Alpha]

Publicado originalmente por Ace♡:

I sure don't review DLC.

So let's look at some numbers:

13,550 reviews for EU4 itself, 92% positive

100 reviews for cossacks, 52%

32 reviews for CoP, 75%

116 reviews fro art of war, 88%

311 reviews for common sense, 55%

so... no?

It was a very buggy release, but the quality of the features mean that if I had to write a review for it it would be a neutral one, neither positive or negative.

Steam review system sucks as it is qualitative (yes/no) rather than real rating, which aren´t perfect but still is better.

[electricnomad]

Vote with your wallets if you don't like it, because that's an actual metric that matters.

I think it's foolish to put much stock in online reviews by anonymous people.

Most of the negative reviews I see for Paradox DLC comes from people who hate the concept of paid DLC, or who judge a DLC on its day one bugs rather than the finished product. The former won't consider a DLC on its actual merits, and the latter are giving Twitter-worthy instantly-out-of-date reviews rather than waiting the 24 hours or so it always takes for Paradox to hotfix the bugs.

[Kuki]

20 euro for a DLC that crashes and deletes my savegame, making me lose 4 hours of my precious leisure time. ♥♥♥♥ them?