nicholiathan wrote:
Let me re-phrase that for you: I think you should give me the good stuff for free and let me buy the shinies. No. The premium content that you spend resources on should always be better than the free stuff you get with purchase. If you pick up a mattress someone has thrown on the curb you expect that you would have gotten better by going to the store and buying one. The expectation that a developer should spend time and effort creating something of value to give it away is ridiculous. Yes, the developer has a social responsibility to fix broken content. The buy has a social responsibility to pay for the products they obtain. That's how economies work.

I fully understood, just not necessarily in agreement. If they want to do something wild and crazy gameplay-wise, and ask for money, I will be happy to give it to them.



I also feel like skin packs never sell well in RTS games, as Dawn of War II and Supreme Commander II both tried this with disastrous results (And the former had the fact it was Warhammer 40K going for it).

Nomas wrote:
DLCs are supposed to bring some extra flavor in the game and not add new game mechanics. For instance Mass Effect DLCs was armor and weapons mostly at least. You dont need those to complete the game and enjoy it fully just more flavor (kinda lame to include only one gun per type in the original though). Extra missions was extra missions you like them you pay for them but the game at least was full (didnt play ME3 yet dont know about the finale fuz :confused So yes main game content and game mechanics should be free and not added as DLCs. Expansions on the other hand are a different story.

Depends, some Mass Effect content changed the game quite dramatically (Firewalker, Kasumi's missions, Pinnacle Station).



As for ME3's finale, I would honest-to-god recommend not completing it. Seriously. Even with the extended cut, it literally undoes so much of the intrigue of the first two games, it retroactively ruins their stories.

Tredecim wrote:
I agree, there are several types of gamers, your post is well done!



I don't know how well Story Packs would fit to the "sandbox" of ES.. but your ideas are good.

I agree with this statement.

DLC = Downloadable content, not just downloadable hats.



If the dev's was to sell expansions and additions, and not give them away for free that's their choice.



The 3 add-ons we get for free already is quite generous, don't forget that.

No, not paid DLC for factions and game mechanics in general.Aesthetics, sure, but the flesh and bone to the game?I believe that it is best to permit everyone owning the game to have it in its entirety.

My 2 cents is that anything that affects how the game is played, it should be free. While it's fine to charge for cosmetic stuff since it doesn't give some one an unfair advantage.

I guess it makes sence. But no matter how or what, devs really need more Stuff implemented in terms of combat.

Supreme Commander had a skin pack that was free with pre-order, paid otherwise. It was included with the bonus units on pre-order, but distinct from them if purchased. As for the budgeting of skin packs, I'm going with what Chris Taylor and Relic's community chat both said: They do take quite a bit to do (Making sure it doesn't bugger the animations, plus all the new models), so when you get no one buying them, it's effectively wasted money on their part.



I agree with your second point completely.



I do agree that something akin to a gameplay change needs to be handled with care. Although Dawn of War, Supreme Commander, Command and Conquer, Red Alert, Starcraft and virtually every other RTS I've ever played have done expansion packs, which of course fracture the player base somewhat. And yet, in every example, I'm glad that they did. The slightly diminished player count is more than made up for by the fact more of those players are back online, playing. You can have a hundred million players, but if they're bored of a stagnant game, your online will still be a ghost town.

I don't agree with your reasoning. The only thing I like better then cheap stuff, is free stuff, but that doesn't pay the developer's bills. A big part of these kinds of strategy games is multi-player, if you fracture the player base through DLC you will wind up with a problem. A fractured player base generally shrinks the user base, you see that often happening when map packs are offered in FPS games. So I agree that mechanical changes or new mechanical systems to the game should be free, not because there are many different types of gamers, but because it keeps the player base unified.



If there was to be paid DLC, make them races or possibly new options. You want a Borg like race with new ships, new tech, new upgrades, new tactical card options, maybe even something unique like a Dyson sphere, make it paid DLC. But make sure that in multi-player games the folks that bought it can use it, but the folks that didn't buy it can still see it (or even invade it, take it over).



The meat of the DLC for Mass Effect 2 and 3 was story DLC, the item DLC was puny and cheap. Supreme Commander 2 didn't have a skin pack, that was a true expansion with new maps, new units, and tech tree expansions.



Skin packs might not sell as well as other DLC, but they are also fairly cheap to produce (relatively) and don't need things like balancing and testing beyond seeing of the skins fit. So skin packs don't need to sell well to be successful.

Skins should be payed DLC, but not factions.

Still those missions in ME2 was there just for the thrills and more things to do, not mandatory for the game.

Was reading the new expansion posts and people seem a bit confused what is paid content and what is free content. This is how I think the best approach to paid content.



Disclaimer: I am someone who studied games design for 4 years and play games far longer, my post is completely not self entitlement my goal has always been to improve games and make them more enjoyable for all. So please understand this before commenting about my views.



My view is



All content that affects the mechanics of the game should be free



-Meaning that content like improved battles/diplomacy or w/e should be free

This is mainly because of player types for example



There are player who play the game only on multi player

There are players who only play single player

There are players who play with friends



There are people who buy all content because we live in a "I want it now society"

There are people who cant for whatever reasons don't buy all content



Causal gamers (that just want to have fun)

Serious gamers (who want challenge)



You solve this dilemma by giving player OPTIONS on how they play meaning all mechanical based content is free like improved AI, more custom race options, more options in setting up a game so the player can tailor his experience of the game.



Greedy companies have been messing this up recently

with restricting content that should of been in the game to paid content or by actively forcing a player to play a specific way



Content should be about improving the game and making the game more fun and G2G is a good idea in the right step.



The reason this is because an improved fun game makes people WANT TO PLAY IT MORE. Where paid content for paid content wants to make players play less

(recently Borderlands 2/Dungeon Defenders both hurt the players types in various ways)



The improved and fun game makes people more excited to play it this leads them to want MORE CONTENT (recently Dark Souls) this then can be paid for and means a lot more money that the silly DLC for DLC sake business design.



it also is to not fragment the player base between what they have and don't have for multi players or even need to play it.





NOW that I talked about what makes good expansions/DLC we all know companies need to make money and the devs need it to for their hard work this is what paid content should be



Good Paid Content For Endless Space



Story Packs

Where players are given a set of missions/goals and a rewarded with cut scenes/voice overs to immerse the player further into the lore of the game and also to teach the the basics of the game as well.



Race Packs

That add interesting new factions to the game now its highly recommended that you balance and test the faction pre-release so the game isn't pay to win.

A good faction is one that is interesting to play and is unique from the default races.



New Skins or visual effects for existing races

that offer alternatives to the races looks this is mostly about how the ships look in this game (btw is just want to say whoever is making the artwork for the ships/races you did a really good job, so props to you)



However another idea would to be custom weapon effects/meaning you pay for a pack that changes what your weapons look like when shot (there in game strength is the same)



there are many more ideas that people can have, all in all content that is paid should be OPTIONAL additions to the games existing content.

DLCs are supposed to bring some extra flavor in the game and not add new game mechanics. For instance Mass Effect DLCs was armor and weapons mostly at least. You dont need those to complete the game and enjoy it fully just more flavor (kinda lame to include only one gun per type in the original though). Extra missions was extra missions you like them you pay for them but the game at least was full (didnt play ME3 yet dont know about the finale fuz :confused So yes main game content and game mechanics should be free and not added as DLCs. Expansions on the other hand are a different story.

Good points. For me, so long as it does not divide the player base, I am happy.

For example, if they release a DLC that prevents people who don't have the DLC from playing with those who do, I am fully against it.

However, DLC that does not divide the player base is fully acceptable. As you mentioned, story packs or skin packs are a great idea.

As for new races, so long the people who haven't bought the new races can play with people who have, I'm all for it.

Let me re-phrase that for you: I think you should give me the good stuff for free and let me buy the shinies. No. The premium content that you spend resources on should always be better than the free stuff you get with purchase. If you pick up a mattress someone has thrown on the curb you expect that you would have gotten better by going to the store and buying one. The expectation that a developer should spend time and effort creating something of value to give it away is ridiculous. Yes, the developer has a social responsibility to fix broken content. The buy has a social responsibility to pay for the products they obtain. That's how economies work.

Hopefully Activision/EA/THQ aren't reading this, but I really don't mind paying for content when I think it's worth it. Borderlands is a great example of that. Sure, they charge $10 per DLC, but they also add about twenty hours worth of campaign, more loot, more enemies, more NPCs and occasionally things like vehicles or gameplay concepts.



So long as Amplitude doesn't get greedy (And going by everything I've seen from them so far, that is not a concern for me in the slightest), I don't mind tossing them some money when they ask for it.

IDC if amp adds payed DLC, just don't be an asshat like steam/civ and make it so only players WITH the DLC can play against players using the DLC.



in essence you have to pay like 90$ in dlc in order to be able to play with everyone on civ5. ♥♥♥♥ everything about that shit.



and my 2 cents, DONT RELEASE FACTIONS FOR DLC (Though with custom faction they probally wont anyway, skins for ships - totally fine (but battle sucks and everyone autos anyway, fix battles first lul)

I would never pay for story packs or skins, but that's just where my own...

Me either - I don't do DLC for the most part anyway - never will, much rather pay more upfront.

I buy a game, I want to pay up front, and in return get a reasonable amount of fixes and minor features added to that game over time, you know, things that should have been there more or less or worked better in the first place.

What about where they want to add an entirely new mechanic? Like say espionage?



I do tend to agree with your premise, but I can see certain large 'new' mechanics being worthy of some payment.



for what it's worth, I would never pay for story packs or skins, but that's just where my own interests don't lie

It does fit it doesn't have to be massive all it needs to do is expand the lore/history of the races and show their goals/motivations (the introduction vids are awesome) to make the player feel as if their that race and there goal is that races goal through predefined missions/systems.



If done right it could be a major selling point

I agree, there are several types of gamers, your post is well done!



I don't know how well Story Packs would fit to the "sandbox" of ES.. but your ideas are good.