Why Do So Many Seem to Hate Paradox DLC Policy?

[Zeliox]

I just don't get it, I like the read these forums (and post on occasion) and I keep seeing every once in a while people "calling Paradox out" because they hate the DLC policy. Most of the time they arne't even complaining about the large expansions, but about the music packs and such. Sure it's a money grab, but they aren't blocking content, they're just saying "here's a pretty shiny thing that adds nothing to the game, but if you want it you can buy it!" I see nothing wrong with that. If they were blocking it off like "you can only play as Rome is you pay us 5 bucks" then sure I could see being upset, but that's not the case at all. If you want some cool new music, buy it. If not then don't complain.

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Also with the fact that most of the major changes in the expansions are free in the updates there's even less reason to be angry about it. I can understand being frustrated if you're strapped for cash and really want one of the DLC, but that's not reason to be angry at Paradox for supporting their games for so long post release.

I'm not trying to be hateful, I really just want to understand what people's reasoning is here.

[Inkidu]

They don't think it's worth buying and instead of just keeping their wallets shut they have to preach from their soapboxes.

[Saxon]

I also have a very hard time understanding this.

-If you don't want to buy DLC, why do you need to share that with the rest of the world?
-If you think the value you are getting is too low for your money, wait for a sale. They go as far as 75% off, so are really able to set your own price if you are patient.
-If you don't like the cosmetic stuff, skip it.
-If you don't like the content of DLC X versus Y, skip it.
-You want it for free? Sorry. Game development is not a form of charity.

No matter what you do, some people will complain just for the attention.

[Minoris]

Some people just lack control of themselves. They feel like they HAVE to buy every single DLC to get the full experience, or they start feeling bad. So they buy everything. Since those people can't wait a single second, they buy it at full price.

Then they blame the dev/publisher because hey, taking responsibility is not something the Internet does.

I think that sums it up.

Edit:
Oh, also...

Originally posted by Jurjen:

They go as far as 75% off, so are really able to set your own price if you are patient.

I'm pretty sure I bought a bunch at 90% off. Wouldn't bet a whole lot on it, but I'm pretty sure I did.

[Dog Of War]

No matter what game it is, I have always been wary of DLCs cause I do not know if they are trustworthy or fully compatible with original game. Rome 2 Total War had a lot of them, from who knows where, and some of them would crash the game, or be obsolete and useless after a few weeks.

If Stellaris is going to get a lot of good ones, I would like to get a list on the ones to avoid. Certainly I want to look at any related to Star Trek content, only I tend to get DLCs and mods mixed up a bit.

[Off-Suit Nines]

To be entirely fair, there have been a few instances where the released DLCs have seriously damaged the existing state of the game to the point where you have to buy them if you want control over important mechanics in the game. This has been almost exclusive to EUIV, but has brought a few uncomfortable moments to CK2 as well.

I'm a big fan of both games, of Paradox, and of their continued support of their games through DLC. I think they've done a great job most of the time. But a few of the DLCs were pretty bloody shady and were flat out required buying. As well, a couple of them have been severely overpriced.

Perhaps the whiners are both too common and too loud, but there is a basis for their complaints. They aren't just screaming about nothing.

[[Q]uik]

No ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ clue really.
While yes, they have had some (very few) DLC which was "shady", most of the time it's really fair - the pricing is also fair, and if you "need" to buy cosmetics then that's your own damned problem if anything..
I don't understand either seeing as Paradox has among the most fair DLC policies out there

[cG.vahnn]

When I was buying CKII, I was upset when I checked out the DLC and saw hundreds of dollars of stuff there, with dozens of DLCs for sale. Then I realized that only 3 or 4 of them actually introduced new playable factions and game mechanics and could be had for about 25 bucks. The rest are purely cosmetic and literally affect nothing.

And even if you don't buy the DLC with new races and mechanics, you can still play with people who have those, you just won't be able to play as those factions or mechanics, so it's not really splitting the community.

It's not a bad DLC policy. And trust me... I'm one of those guys who hates the idea of DLC and, more specifically, it's implementation, with 90% of games I've played. Paradox's DLC is not bad for the game or gamers.

[Minoris]

Steam should change it's DLC tabs actually, in my opinion.
They should really make 2 different lists: one for DLCs, and another for proper expansion packs.
Would make things clearer and... less scary.

[Engellus]

I honestly agree with Paradox and their strategy, but I can also, at the same time, understand the problem people take with it. Some of the DLC's released have been lacklustre and when priced like an expansion it's a let down. Cossacks DLC for EU4 an example to me. Interesting stuff, not overly exciting in my opinion.

So if you're someone who has some sort of OCD, which I am guilty of myself, you'll want to own the 'complete' game. That means owning all the DLC for a game, whether you utilize it or not. Rome 2 and Attila are two that dragged me down that path. But with regards to Paradox games, you can't complain that much. The DLC is generally qutie cheap and balanced as far as price to what you get. Would I be happier if the cosmetic DLC was cheaper? Absolutely. Is it over-priced? Yeah, probably a little bit. But I can understand why, it's something that helps them work on a game for such a long term. Take my 50 cents from the cosmetic DLC for CK2 and throw it into the production of Stellaris. I won't complain. Paradox ain't padding their pockets with my chump change.

I think Paradox is doing a fairly good job, could they make it better for me? Yes. Would that make it worse for them? Absolutely. Are they treating the consumer unfairly with the prices they've been setting? No. Compared to the market? Hell no.

You can't complain about Paradox DLC until you've gone blue in the face from complaining about Creative Assembly and Sega.

[[Q]uik]

Originally posted by Engellus:

So if you're someone who has some sort of OCD, which I am guilty of myself, you'll want to own the 'complete' game. That means owning all the DLC for a game, whether you utilize it or not.

This is not something anyone should take into consideration when making and pricing a game however, i'm afraid. That is nobodys problem but your own - and you cannot blame paradox for your own issues :/

[Fleshhunter]

Originally posted by Quik:

Originally posted by Engellus:

So if you're someone who has some sort of OCD, which I am guilty of myself, you'll want to own the 'complete' game. That means owning all the DLC for a game, whether you utilize it or not.

This is not something anyone should take into consideration when making and pricing a game however, i'm afraid. That is nobodys problem but your own - and you cannot blame paradox for your own issues :/

You can blame anyone for anything...People don't have any sense of logic

[Drake]

Originally posted by Zeliox:

I just don't get it, I like the read these forums (and post on occasion) and I keep seeing every once in a while people "calling Paradox out" because they hate the DLC policy. Most of the time they arne't even complaining about the large expansions, but about the music packs and such. Sure it's a money grab, but they aren't blocking content, they're just saying "here's a pretty shiny thing that adds nothing to the game, but if you want it you can buy it!" I see nothing wrong with that. If they were blocking it off like "you can only play as Rome is you pay us 5 bucks" then sure I could see being upset, but that's not the case at all. If you want some cool new music, buy it. If not then don't complain.

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Also with the fact that most of the major changes in the expansions are free in the updates there's even less reason to be angry about it. I can understand being frustrated if you're strapped for cash and really want one of the DLC, but that's not reason to be angry at Paradox for supporting their games for so long post release.

I'm not trying to be hateful, I really just want to understand what people's reasoning is here.

So, I'll fix it for you: "Why do very few hate Paradox DLC policy"

Vast majority actually support Paradox's DLC policy. They don't abuse the DLC as other infamous developers do.

[Drake]

Originally posted by Engellus:

So if you're someone who has some sort of OCD, which I am guilty of myself, you'll want to own the 'complete' game. That means owning all the DLC for a game, whether you utilize it or not.

OCD has nothing to do with it. It's just you, wanting to spend money on something you don't use, and complaining about it.

It's the same as purchasing a vehicle, and then complaining that a tow package will cost you $1,500 extra, a smoker package (even though you don't smoke) is $300, rubber floor mats $500, bike racks (even though you don't even own bicycles) $1,200, etc.. you get the idea.

That same model applies to vast majority of goods. Same goes for buying a TV, and all possible systems that hook up to it. Etc, etc, etc.....

You must simply learn the value of money, investments, and be in control of your finances. This comes with being an adult, knowing what you need is different from what you want, and what your financial and other goals are.....

[Zeliox]

Originally posted by Dog Of War:

No matter what game it is, I have always been wary of DLCs cause I do not know if they are trustworthy or fully compatible with original game. Rome 2 Total War had a lot of them, from who knows where, and some of them would crash the game, or be obsolete and useless after a few weeks.

If Stellaris is going to get a lot of good ones, I would like to get a list on the ones to avoid. Certainly I want to look at any related to Star Trek content, only I tend to get DLCs and mods mixed up a bit.

It sounds like you're talking about mods... not DLC. DLC is made for the game and only the game, and they don't just become obsolete, they're a part of the game, made by the developers.

[Zeliox]

Originally posted by Drake:

Originally posted by Zeliox:

I just don't get it, I like the read these forums (and post on occasion) and I keep seeing every once in a while people "calling Paradox out" because they hate the DLC policy. Most of the time they arne't even complaining about the large expansions, but about the music packs and such. Sure it's a money grab, but they aren't blocking content, they're just saying "here's a pretty shiny thing that adds nothing to the game, but if you want it you can buy it!" I see nothing wrong with that. If they were blocking it off like "you can only play as Rome is you pay us 5 bucks" then sure I could see being upset, but that's not the case at all. If you want some cool new music, buy it. If not then don't complain.

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Also with the fact that most of the major changes in the expansions are free in the updates there's even less reason to be angry about it. I can understand being frustrated if you're strapped for cash and really want one of the DLC, but that's not reason to be angry at Paradox for supporting their games for so long post release.

I'm not trying to be hateful, I really just want to understand what people's reasoning is here.

So, I'll fix it for you: "Why do very few hate Paradox DLC policy"

Vast majority actually support Paradox's DLC policy. They don't abuse the DLC as other infamous developers do.

That's precisely why I said "seem", as I do believe the vast majority like it, the vocal minority are very vocal.