Let the game be released first, then worry about DLC.

4x_Fan wrote:


If your modern 4x game lacks features that either of these two had, your game is bad and you should feel bad

I disagree with this. What you are saying is that every new game should incorporate all features of every game (in the same genre) before it. If everything were to follow this design philosophy then you would end up with nothing but bloated clones. Sometimes you need to start from first principles and make decisions on what features to implement based on resources and priorities.



(And yes, I played those games too).



My impression is that the priority at the moment is getting a solid base from which to build. If you really expect that it should include every feature ever developed for a previous 4X game and still be perfectly balanced and bug free.. well, I think you're being unrealistic there.



Of course you're entitled to not like the end result . If you don't think the game is sufficiently ambitious then of course you don't have to play it.

I hope that they don't charge for DLC, that is always just ridiculous. They shouldn't charge for the game either.

lurker wrote:
Not sure that I would say that I expect espionage 'as standard', in a 4x game. I can think of many which do not have such a feature.



And personally I don't mind paying for an addon/dlc further down the line, I already feel I've probably got my money's worth from the game and it's not even out of Alpha yet. But that's a matter of opinion, of course.

MoO II ~ Espionage

SMAC ~ Espionage

GalCiv II ~ Espionage

Ascendancy ~ Espionage. (Unsportsmanlike Scientists: The Dubtaks are unsportsmanlike scientists. You can steal any technology known by at least two other races.)





Do I need to go on? hint: Ascendancy was released in 1995, Moo II 1996. You might think that almost 20 years would lead to some increases in the genre... not reductions.



Ascendancy

Master of Orion II: Battle at Antares



If your modern 4x game lacks features that either of these two had, your game is bad and you should feel bad





The point is simple: I'm not seeing much "design ambition" from the dev team here, even on fairly standard features. e.g. Cloaked ships / tech stealing: if you've not noticed a lot of items give +scanning in game, so it's logical to expect something to require the detection. At the moment... there isn't.





*shrug*





I'll wait until the patch next week to see if there's major additions or people just tweaking the XML. If it's the latter... ZZzz.

WAY WAY WAY too early to be thinking dlc. This is an alpha, so we are talking all about the main game, not the add on.





You may be thinking "but he talked about it etc" and yeah your right. but I have experience with design, it is fluid. At this point they probably have NO concrete idea what the dlc's will be, heck they may not have CONCRETE ideas of everything that will be in the final game.



So please be patient, enjoy the ride, comment etc. If you ask for a definate answer at this point, someone will be disapointed. That is what I am trying to say, so sit back, grab a bagette and enjoy your trip on the sundae bar.

4x_Fan wrote:
In this thread, the Dev team list which suggestions they're considering ~ esp. regarding espionage:

















Could we have some clarification here please?



#1 By 'post release' does this mean free add in patches (like the awesome SPAZ team do providing free+ content and modding tools a year after release) or as paid DLC?



#2 "add on" certainly suggests paid DLC ~ given the price point of the game (which I've mentioned before) nickel & diming the players for content that you expect as standard in a 4x game is a distasteful move.



#3 Looking at the list of 'suggestions and wishes' thread, there's no mention of diplomatic options ~ please tell us you're fixing this?









But yeah ~ some clarification would be great. If the intention is for paid DLC, I'm afraid I'm ditching this immediately. Paying extra for options that most 4x games consider standard is something I expect from EA, not an indy team.

Not sure that I would say that I expect espionage 'as standard', in a 4x game. I can think of many which do not have such a feature.



And personally I don't mind paying for an addon/dlc further down the line, I already feel I've probably got my money's worth from the game and it's not even out of Alpha yet. But that's a matter of opinion, of course.

maceman wrote:
So wait, you really are communist?!



Now see... with the tone of your posts... and the communist thing down below...



totally misread you and thought it was all a joke. turns out you're uber serious? fascinating :P



so wait American Native... or Native American? (I'm still reserving judgement on your whole thing)

Native American, American Native, Indian, whatever label you think most appropriate. To clarify, I don't have an issue with persons making money by producing video games. I do have problems with companies and publishers, profits and capital. It's understandable that given the current state of the revolution people will have to use their various skills to make money. For the vast majority of us this means selling our labour piecemeal. However this thread isn't the place for a political discussion of any depth, I could go on for some time about all of this, so I will leave it with this brevity.

VieuxChat wrote:
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear about what I was speaking about : SPAZ. How did that game was funded ?

SPAZ was funded by people buying into the alpha/beta, I was very hesitant to buy SPAZ since it was an unfinished game from a team I hadn't heard of before (just like Endless Space for me), but since release they have updated their game with things they technically could have asked money for but didn't. In return they have made many very local fans like myself who would buy their next game in a heartbeat regardless of what they decide to make.



That's why I agree with OP that it's important that a game looking as good as Endless Space not have paid-for DLC, people are saying that companies need to make money which is very true but you have to think whether it's actually going to be more profitable in the long run or not since the respect you gain by fleshing out your game and adding fairly common features of the genre can go such a long way when it comes to trying to sell expansions, sequels or just other games from the same developers.



That's not even including the other problems that paid-for DLC can cause such as playerbase fragmentation, if 50% of players buy the espionage DLC then how does that factor into multiplayer games? Most likely I either won't be able to join them or I just won't want to because of the disadvantage. Add in just 1 more paid-for DLC and you have four groups of players; people with no DLC, people with both, people with just the first and people with only the second, the problem grows exponentially with each paid-DLC added and that whole point again comes back into the money discussion, if many of your players feel alienated trying to play multiplayer then why would they want to buy your expansion/sequel if they know they will just be forced to buy DLC every few months just to play online?

ArrowLance wrote:
I gotta say my favorite civ is still civ III.

Mine is Alpha Centauri.But don't we get off topic right now?

ArrowLance wrote:
Native American, American Native, Indian, whatever label you think most appropriate. To clarify, I don't have an issue with persons making money by producing video games. I do have problems with companies and publishers, profits and capital. It's understandable that given the current state of the revolution people will have to use their various skills to make money. For the vast majority of us this means selling our labour piecemeal. However this thread isn't the place for a political discussion of any depth, I could go on for some time about all of this, so I will leave it with this brevity.

Hmm... fair enough. I'll still refrain from judgement.



But keep in mind when you start judging others, like the developers and their choices of how to release a product they've made with their own sweat, blood and tears from the perspective of a political dogma ...



... folks will judge you back. it's only natural.



PS You have clearly not lived in a Communist country not called North Korea. Times they is a changin'

lurker wrote:
Oh no, don't say that, he's going to start frothing at the mouth ranting about how Civ V was dumbed down now :P

I gotta say my favorite civ is still civ III.

halflotus wrote:
The current market has the 4x standard-bearer, Civilization, releasing espionage in a paid expansion. I expect Endless Space to do the same.

Oh no, don't say that, he's going to start frothing at the mouth ranting about how Civ V was dumbed down now :P

ArrowLance wrote:
I want to correct you, products produced for exchange are priced based on the market. Products made for use may not have any price at all.

The current market has the 4x standard-bearer, Civilization, releasing espionage in a paid expansion. I expect Endless Space to do the same.

VieuxChat wrote:
How did they fund their game ?

Well... apart from coding part-time, they did a pre-order beta thing. Then lots of people spread the word, they got a deal with Impulse / Steam to release it [Ithinkafewmonthsafterithadactuallygonegold] and it has sold ever since.



You know, like Amplitude have done? (only.. alpha, not beta).







Oh, and bothering to make a physical product release these days?



Interesting business choice given the largest player in the physical retail space just went bust.





But, I'm sure you Frenchies know what you're doing...

halflotus wrote:
Products are priced based on their value to customers and the market conditions, not on how many days it takes to create them.

I want to correct you, products produced for exchange are priced based on the market. Products made for use may not have any price at all.

Mtwo wrote:
I believe that Half Life had Sierra as a publisher,after that,Steam was released and Valve has EA as a publisher for physical copies.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear about what I was speaking about : SPAZ. How did that game was funded ?

I could quote Dominions 3 has an excellent game done by... 1 guy. Yeah 1.



In fact, I may be a bit naive. If devs say that they don't want it at the moement because they can't do it right in their view, I trust them. Because I don't know how the code is done. There's not one way to code detection and so cloaking. Maybe it's more for a gameplay problem ?

Anyway they didn't ditch it forever. Time will tell

VieuxChat wrote:
How did they fund their game ?

I believe that Half Life had Sierra as a publisher,after that,Steam was released and Valve has EA as a publisher for physical copies.

In this thread, the Dev team list which suggestions they're considering ~ esp. regarding espionage:

SpaceTroll wrote:


When we'll do it we'll do it nicely. So definitely post release.

SpaceTroll wrote:


Post release. it could be a nice addition to an extension focusing on espionage.

SpaceTroll wrote:


We want one day to be able to do it right, definitely and add on thing.

Could we have some clarification here please?



#1 By 'post release' does this mean free add in patches (like the awesome SPAZ team do providing free+ content and modding tools a year after release) or as paid DLC?



#2 "add on" certainly suggests paid DLC ~ given the price point of the game (which I've mentioned before) nickel & diming the players for content that you expect as standard in a 4x game is a distasteful move.



#3 Looking at the list of 'suggestions and wishes' thread, there's no mention of diplomatic options ~ please tell us you're fixing this?









But yeah ~ some clarification would be great. If the intention is for paid DLC, I'm afraid I'm ditching this immediately. Paying extra for options that most 4x games consider standard is something I expect from EA, not an indy team.

I still yearn for a remake of the potential that was Emperor of the Fading Suns... i would PAY for that. no free DLC needed :P

How did they fund their game ?