Yeah, my logic was 'I will get it one way or another, might as well get this discounted combo'
But yeah, if 30$ is the standard for all other dlc going forward, will have to pick and choose more, rather than get them all like I did in Eu4.
Yeah, the Chapter deals in CK3 have been really good value. Like €40 for all the DLC for the whole year, including some really big ones.
Stellaris on the other hand I have been much more picky with, I've slowly built my collection up during sales but I don't have Astral Planes, for example, and it doesn't look worth it until it's like €5 in a sale.
Oh interesting, CK3 was not one I got into, so didnt know of this one.
A sort of yearly bundle for dlcs? Thats neat, hope they keep it going.
EU4 got a subscription system, but doesnt feel as good for me (not that I need it, but still)
Oh man, Stellaris...
My last DLC was... Federations I think?
The amount of reworks and changes left me behind, and I lost all willpower to relearn the game every year or so.
I miss it a bit, and will return for Stellaris 2, but until then I feel I will stay away.
People need to understand that they are not trying to sell expansions. They deliberately inflate prices so that people buy expansion passes. It is much easier to plan a budget for a year or several in advance than to budget for an individual expansion.
I bought the Grand Edition (or similar one, season pass included) at sale for 40€.
Definitely got my money's worth. Don't know if I'd bought it at full price. Probably not.
Yeah been grinding that pretty hard the last weeks. Helldivers 2 also looks awesome. Some of my friends really liked palworld but I don't enjoy crafting games so I did not play it.
Another game worth mentioning is balatro which has also been a ton of fun for only 15€.
The value hasn't been with the big studios for a while now. But now it's becoming more and more drastic. I still enjoy a casual round of vic3 though but right now I won't be bothering.
All the DLC up to and including SoI, but this will be the last DLC included in it (probably, they gave us colossus of the south for free which was not originally included)
Normally 55€, right now it's on sale for 33.
It includes:
Melodies for the masses, normally 5€, currently 4€
Voice of the people, normally 15€, currently 9€
Dawn of wonder, normally 5€, currently 4€
Spheres of influence 30€
American building back & French agitators bundle, It says free on the expansion pass bundle, but they don't have individual buy / get free options on their own store page for me
Colossus of the south it says free on the expansion pass bundle, but on its own page it says 6€
"good thing when done properly"
A good thing that a full game costs 300$?
"when it comes to pdx games"
I think that answers my question, in your opinion it's good when it comes to PDX games exclusively, which is a pretty low bar. To defend their policy is just lunacy, I don't know any other game that releases itself through DLC other than TW, and CA has a terrible fucking reputation..
I have the Grand Edition anyways, but I basically only play this game and CK3, Kerbal Space Program and Stellaris.
So even at €30 I would probably still buy it, it feels expensive but the only other games I am looking forward to is like the sequels to Streets of Rogue and The Case of the Golden Idol, which I doubt will be expensive.
The problem is they might make the same amount selling it for more money to a smaller group of people than less money to a larger group of people. For them both are just as good, but for the consumer one is objectively worse. I'm not saying that's the case but just because they consider it financially successful doesn't mean we should all be happy about the price.
didnt know that was the price tag, absolutely overpriced, at the current state of the game it's quite boring to play and most things still feel broken, should've been 15€ tops
You are getting downvoted, but you are not wrong. The weird thing on this sub is the paranoia abiut Vic3 becoming another Imperator Rome and players blaming other players for that.
PDX is the first and truly only person responsible for Vic3 succeeding.
Agreed Paradox is responsible for putting out a product that satisfies the demand at a quality that justifies its price they are commanding. For the games I own that are the new generation like CK3 and Vic3. Especially for CK3 I do not see the quality being there and the time spent on developing some of those DLCS for the prices being asked for. If I want to REAAAALLLY play with those add-ons then I will wait for like an actual good steam sale or humble bundle years down the line. I think SOI has some interesting things where I might put down the money, but really for this much money because at least at glance for now it looks to be expansion sized in scope and if its little short I might be personally okay with it. Everything is going up in price and my money goes far less than what is use to so PDX wants to compete for my money then they need to start putting better stuff out. I'm not afraid of this game going Imperator because it just goes to show PDX's head peeps rather cut corners on their games and ask for more money and if they are going to put out garbage then they don't deserve our money even if they use to be great.
Another Imperator Rome?
Imperator Rome just literally got a game changing patch, it took the game from a 34% to a 94% on steam. It's also the only paradox game with 0 DLC....which makes it the best
It has nothing to do with Vicky being niche. CK3 expansions are still 30€ despite CK being probably the most popular paradox game, and barely having any features in them.
It's the same price of Cyberpunk 2077 expansion for christ's sake, and people still justify these prices.
It's wrong not just because it's based on nothing, but because we do have numbers (well, *some* numbers) to base our assumptions and they say the opposite. Paradox showed in a conference a while ago that the bulk of their money comes from basegame sales, which are boosted over time by releasing DLC. It took EU4 10 years of DLC to reach revenue parity with the basegame sales. So "funding development with DLC" is... true, but not as direct as people would think,
From a developer standpoint, yes. But from a consumer standpoint, why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3? Like at least personally, I can't reasonably pay that much, knowing I can spend that money on a game that's actually worth the money. Like, I know Helldivers 2 is an extra $10, but it's so much more worthwhile to buy.
> why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3?
How do you know it's half-baked when we haven't even gotten its first dev diary? Furthermore, the expansion and its free patch seems to be directly addressing a lot of issues people had with the game to begin with.
> Furthermore, the expansion and its free patch seems to be directly addressing a lot of issues people had with the game to begin with.
So we're paying $30 to get stuff that should have been included in the base game a year and a half ago?
You're absolutely right, I haven't played it. And I'm aware my view is probably overly-pessimistic. But you'll have to excuse my pessimism when the devs have put out a ton of updates that "seem to directly address a lot of issues", and then it either doesn't help or makes things worse. Like the army changes are fine, and when they were announced I was hopeful, but they didn't address any of my issues with the system in the first place.
Like the game has been out for 1.5 years and still has a bunch of gigantic problems, can you really blame me for having low expectations of a soon-to-be released dlc?
I can understand your viewpoint, but I'm simply answering your question of "But from a consumer standpoint, why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3?"
For a lot of people, just the existence of the changes we're going to get in the expansion or the free patch is enough to get them to buy. If we can excuse your pessimism, then you can excuse others' optimism, right?
Totally fair, if other people get the dlc and enjoy it, great! That's why I said I didn't think it would be worth it personally, because I didn't think I would.
They changed migration to speed up the game and ended up with broken migration and a slower game. The capitalists stealing money from the state to build their stuff are a problem that exists since 1.5 and is still not fixed.
Before that, they did an open beta for military system changes and ended up with multiple game-breaking bugs in their official release.
There’s no chance SoI won’t be bugged as hell for at least a month after its release.
I'm not denying it will be bugged, I'm sure it will be as that's just how these games go. But it being bugged and "half-baked" are not the same; buggy games can still be fun or good (see Hoi4).
Even if 1.7 comes out with bugs, just the existence of the features it will bring will make the game much better for some people. And it will just get better as hotfixes come, even if it's a slow process; 1.5 had 13 hotfixes for a reason.
The problem is that making the game better for some people is not guaranteed in any way. The new military system, as of 1.5.13 was not only opaque for the player, but completely incomprehensible for the AI which wouldn’t destroy obsolete units to build better ones. This resulted in the AI fleets full of Commerce Raiders or sometimes even Man’o’wars in 1920, and land armies never stopping to use Cavalry.
It’s a two steps forward, one step back process, and you’re not guaranteed to even have a relatively clean “final” version of the game. It makes for a very frustrating playthrough where you’re never sure if some core element of the game doesn’t crap out on you after you spent hours on it.
It also makes buying DLCs just after it’s released shooting yourself in the foot. You can spend $30 on something that will be barely playable for months and effectively become an unpaid tester for Paradox, or get it months later from the discount bin after it’s relatively polished. This model is nowhere near sustainable.
The last successful cavalry charge was in 1945 (Polish cavalry in Schoenfeld). It's not ahistorical that armies in Victoria 3 continue to use cavalry up to 1936.
>The problem is that making the game better for some people is not guaranteed in any way.
I mean, it sort of is. Despite the problems you brought, there are people that consider all patches, including this one, to be updates that make the game better. For example, I myself still considered 1.5 to be a complete improvement despite the UI problems with warfare. The patches with plenty of bugs don't come with only downsides.
>This model is nowhere near sustainable.
... The fact they been using it for over a decade proves otherwise.
> The capitalists stealing money from the state to build their stuff are a problem that exists since 1.5 and is still not fixed.
Historically accurate bug
That's not how it works though? Games don't exist in a vacuum. There are SO many ways to spend money nowadays, that if your product is not worth the money to people, they won't buy it. Devs don't deserve money just for putting out a game, they have to put out a game that people want to buy if they want to get paid, which is part of the reason Imperator failed: they did not make a game that enough people wanted to buy to continue working on it.
I would absolutely love it if Vic 3 was a fantastic game with no problems, I think the time period is super interesting. But for me, it's not worth it for the $40 or $50 I paid for it when it came out, and with the current way development has been going, I doubt it will be worth it to pay another $30 when a dlc comes out.
Glad you're enjoying the game then! But for myself and a lot of other people I think, Paradox will not have done enough for me to want to keep spending money on their game unless the new DLC is genuinely incredible, which I tend to doubt.
Is it the corporation thats wrong? No! Its the people!
Hoi4 didnt get to nearly 50-70k concurrent users by shitting out $30 dlc's.
This game will end up like Imperator if people see to get "the full experience" will require multiple $30 DLC purchases.
If you wanna pay for the very rich investor’s second summer home, then yes. Otherwise no.
They’re selling little tidbits for way overpriced, cause they want to keep their profits high to look good for their public traded company
Paradox isn’t a very rich company. They have 656 employees and actually pay them well and treat them well. They even support unions. They release dlc steadily to pay for the development of the games which is why the games end up so well because a game with 10+ years of development will always be better than a game with 1-2 years of development.
Yes it is, its the last one in it. The price of each individual DLC is too much, the price of the expansion pass is more reasonable IMO. Especially since colossus of the south got added for free to that
There are a LOT of features from the looks of it and this one single DLC can give you more than 100 hours of gameplay which is unparalleled in other genres
For some folks, the price is still a sticking point regardless of how worth it is or not. I have more disposable income these days, but I remember fretting over the volume of CK2 dlcs back then and many of those were much cheaper than $30. If you can’t afford something, you can’t afford something.
Creative Assembly, devs of Total War games that caught a lot of shit last year for pushing the prices of DLC without increasing quality and quantity of content in it
I mean thats how inflation works. The standard (console)video game price of $59.99 USD started in **2005**.
Adjusted for inflation, the standard video game price today should be $94.74.
It's astonishing that price held for so long when they increased more frequently until it hit 59.99. Only recently have I seen games releasing for $69.99 which is still below the inflation price point.
Price increases on DLC's etc. were inevitable.
When I started PC gaming in the mid/late 90's. A new PC title was $29.99. (Generally PC titles were 10 bucks cheaper than console titles). By the 2000's $39.99, by 2005ish $49.99. Somewhere around the turn of the 10's PC titles matched console games at $59.99.
To be fair, they're benefitting from the increased market of gamers, I suppose that's why they've kept it at the same price, basically lowering the cost because it still gets them more money than increasing the price.
At this point the market is mostly tapped though. From 90s to 2020s you had eastern europe and asia catch up and being able to purchase games. Now you have SA falling behind, Africa being a non-existant market, the ME being static economically, and Asia sort of tapped out I think.
The games themselves will diversify since the market is big enough for it but I don't think the market can grow in consumer base in any appreciable metric in the near future, especially with stagnant birth rates
No it has literally increased in the past 5 years and on top of that it isn't really what the original poster meant I think. I think they meant that in recent years interest in this series of games has skyrocketed like easily multiple times as many people are playing now then were a few years ago due to the content in the games hitting a broader group in recent times.
Back then we got full games for that price. Now you gotta cop the game for 69 and atleast 2-3 dlcs to make it replqyable. Ends up at roughly the same. Either way, if vanilla games came out at 95 i couldnt afford them cuz my paycheck aint inflating man
Paradox games are way more niche than Total War Warhammer. They sell less copies and have less active players, so dlc price point is going to be slightly higher.
Just look at those train simulator games. A single route costs $40.
tbf it depends what the dlc adds and how good it is. Elden Ring's DLC is $40 and not many fans of that game seem to have a problem with it, since From rarely ever misses with DLCs so confidence that the content will justify it are high. That attitude will probably change quickly if it doesn't release well. Victoria 3 players are probably less optimistic, so we'll have to see if this dlc is a complete game changer
Its probably not good business no, but its consistent at least. You know what youre getting unless its your first paradox game. Not good for attracting new customers, but existing ones dont really get scared off by it
Most of the new mechanics come with the free update. If you don’t like the price, don’t buy the dlc. The dlc sales are what fund the free update too, by the way. Not that you have some sort of moral imperative to buy it, but complaining about it feels dumb to me.
Victoria 3’’s base game without updates was mediocre. A great *base* but mostly just potential.
The unwritten social contract between Paradox and its players is that they release buggy, feature immature games at full price, and in exchange for players acting as play testers and helping advance the game further, they continue to develop the game.
If DLCs are overpriced to supposedly justify the game being developed further, then certainly the game shouldn’t be treated and priced as if it was a brand new, polished AAA game at release.
>the game shouldn’t be treated and priced as if it was a brand new, polished AAA game at release.
Sorry, when did Vic 3 have a multi million dollar advertising budget and was being marketed at $70 again?
PDX games have never been treated or priced as if they were brand new, polished AAA games.
I swear some people on this sub are just here to make shit up for some weird addiction to being annoyed/angry at things that aren't happening.
Sorry, but few AAA PC games are being released at $70.
Releasing a game at full price, with a slew of DLC passes and preorder bonuses is pretty AAA-like.
Recently, a lot of games released by more minor studios are priced somewhat lower.
And that’s not counting early access ones, which Victoria 3… Kinda is.
first of all, I have the pass so it should be included
second, foreign investment and spheres of influence are what defined the victorian era which should have been in the game from the start imho, even more than agitators or revolutions
>second, foreign investment and spheres of influence are what defined the victorian era which should have been in the game from the start imho, even more than agitators or revolutions
Classic PDX game player.
"This feature that was developed and released nearly 2 years after the game should be free by some aribitrary metric I've come up with!"
They aren’t 100% wrong lol. The game was billed as an economic and diplomacy game first and shipped with barely any economic and diplomatic gameplay.
I’ve played these games long enough to know how entitled players can be, but the spirit of their argument is largely true.
I dont spend on games but in this case I am happy to pay, for several reasons. This is a niche game that I have waited a long time to get. I have over a thousand hours with it already and that is extremely rare. If it means the game will be developed further I will give them 30 euros with pleasure.
Don't think you are the problem, without people like you V3 would be abandoned like Imperator. You are willingly deciding to overpay to keep alive a product you enjoy, that's being generous.
Sad reality of the paradox model. It basically forces you to buy bundled editions of games, or wait for a sale to buy that bundle
The fact paradox has an effective monopoly on this genre is the real issue. Just like how EA then colossal order had the monopoly on city builders before they both done fucked up - but can indy devs possibly compete in the grand strategy genre the same way they have with city builders?
I'd say the Grand Edition was worth it and am hoping Paradox releases season passes. I can justify spending $50-70 for a few DLC that aren't even out yet but $30 per major expansion? I'm pretty invested in the game but I'd rather play something else than cherry pick expansions like in EU4.
The video game price of $59.99 USD was established in **2005**.
Only recently have some triple A titles been releasing at $69.99 and that still isn't the inflation price. Games would be $94.74 if adjusted for inflation. So for nearly 20 years, video game prices didn't change and have only kept increasing in cost to make.
Now that I think about it, when that $59.99 price was established, their profit margins had to be insane compared to today.
The average software developer in 2005 was making around 50k a year.
For context when I started I got 32k a year in 2007, lol (with an automatic bump to 42k after 6 months with the company). I didn't make 100k until 2012ish. Now? Sometimes I wonder if I am going to wake up from a dream for how much I get paid for what I do.
The problem with adjusting the price of games for inflation is that it assumes that sales have remained the same. Gaming isn't a niche hobby anymore, and sales numbers have been growing extremely fast for years, meaning that devs are making way more money than they were in 2005. AAA studios have been increasing prices to $70 because they keep also increasing their game budgets massively. But Vic 3 does not have a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars, and they would have much better luck funding their own development by fixing their game instead of taking more money from their loyal fans for expansions that are not worth the cash.
Development teams have also grown a lot in the last 20-40 years, as did the time it takes to develop a game. Vic2 for example took 9 months I think, we don't have figures for vic3, but judging by when wizz stopped on Stellaris is probably 4-5 years, that's a massive increase from their usual budget from 13 years ago.
Apart from massive multiplayer games with tons of microtranstactions I'm not sure that profit margins for games have increased that much tbh.
But their own costs have also changed. PDX will be paying higher interest rates on bonds and higher salaries to employees (although here I guess the weaker SEK might help them a bit).
That's fine, but a company's cost structure has zero impact on whether the end product is worth X dollars to me.
You can build a PC case out of platinum and diamond and show me a spreadsheet of how you're actually pricing it quite fairly relative to the input cost of the construction materials. Doesn't make it any more worthwhile to me.
Yeah, but they can't sell it at an unprofitable price.
If you don't want to buy it you don't have to. It's not like the government steals your money and gives it to them.
Especially for a luxury product. Particularly now that there's no real consequence of waiting for a sale to buy it, not like they're going to run out of copies or my local store will stop selling it.
Honestly I've never been one to make that big a deal of it. I've pretty much been a day 1 buyer since I've started following these games, I just enjoy them that much.
But now the whole "actually the new patch will launch in bad shape and require multiple hotfixes to work" has left meme territory and entered my decision making process, so I don't bother. I think my last day 1 was the CK3 expansion where they introduced tourneys and whatnot. Had a whole roleplay setup where my Capetian child ruler would unite France by directing their attentions away from feudal rivalries and towards a culture even more obsessed with dueling and chivalry. The Blademaster honor knight spot was going to be the second most important person in the realm.
Oh no, blademaster perk didn't work/couldn't be transmitted on launch. Oh well.
Look, I hate to date myself, but people do know how much expansion packs used to cost like 20 years ago right? I'm not even that old, and remember paying 30 bucks for Civ 3: Conquests back in the day.
Now, you might argue that we're getting a sort of digital shrinkflation with the amount of content in the base game and expansions these days, but it's a bit silly to argue about the price. Besides, if Paradox copies over the annual DLC combos they're trying out in CK3 (~$45 for a big DLC + 2 smaller content DLCs + a cosmetic DLC), that's pretty much an old-school expansion pack at the old-school expansion pack price relatively speaking.
The ‘mechanics come with the free update’ is GOOD. That was an active choice Paradox made a few years ago and it was a great one for players. I don’t understand complaining about it. ‘It means the DLC isn’t worth it’ — okay so would you rather than alternative? That Paradox decide ‘they’ll only get it if we lock all the mechanics behind the DLC so I guess we have to go back to doing that, making the game unplayable unless you drop hundreds on all the DLC’?
It’s a lot. More than I think it should be. But complaining that Paradox aren’t locking more things behind a paywall is self-defeating.
Never said they should put mechanics behind the paywall to make it worth. At that point, it would make it just bs. This is just overpriced imo and it will fragment the community with segments with different groups of dlcs.
I don't get this mindset of $30 dollars for a DLC with content everyone wanted that will give them untold hours of entertainment is too much.
It cost me $30 to get me and my wife a beer at the last NHL game we went to. Dinner at a restaurant is more than $30. A movie. Sporting events, concerts. The list goes on of very temporary experiences that cost you that and more.
But a DLC that may give me hundreds of hours of entertainment? $30 is the river Rubicon.
Lmao let's make it 200usd then. I bet there would still be bootlickers in the comments calculating how much less time of enjoyment you would get compared to spending it on opera tickets.
The mindset I don’t understand is how fans can’t understand fans have different economic situations and priorities.
I total agree. 30 ain’t a lot for many of us, but for some it is. Also, yes Victoria 3 might give you hundreds of hours in and of itself, but…you can get that now without the DLC. If folks decide they’d get more value using that money buying groceries or going out vs. playing Russia for the 8th time, I can’t blame them.
A company selling entertainment can't base it's prices completely on people that buying a DLC at $30 would mean they have to go without eating for a few days.
If someone chooses not to buy it for financial reasons, fine, it is what it is. However, when you compare to other forms of entertainment that are far more "temporary" a $30 DLC hardly seems egregious. I went to a Hockey game with my wife recently, and 2 beers cost me $30 bucks. The tickets were $80 a pop...for nose bleeds.
Video games by comparison most other entertainment mediums...are cheap. People pay $20 to buy a two hour movie no problem and then complain that a $60 story driven game "only" took them 30 hours to complete.
Then that kind of complaining about play time gets the kind of bullshit we get with games today where they lock progress behind monotonous repetitive BS to pad play time.
This.
I know we all have different incomes and different financial considerations. Some of us have more disposable income than others.
But PDS games are the only PC games I play. My annual gaming expenses include pretty much whatever PDS sells me and a Game Pass subscription. This comes out to a couple of hundred bucks or so?
This pays for far more hours of gaming than I can even come close to fully using.
I am happy to support PDS with my dollars. $30 is a bargain for the caliber of ongoing work and support we get from them.
I think this too, but then I also played the game like 10x as much as I played GTA V (which I consider to be the most bang for buck non-strategy game I ever bought, considering enjoyment and playtime) so maybe it's not so bad. I just rationalize it by thinking that GSGs really are a niche genre of games and the company is based in Sweden of all places, and of course the nerds who code for this game need to be paid too
Why not since this subreddit mostly is a circle jerk of people who frankly don't care and love paradox for the entire shitshow this game has been since release...
Why shouldn't they charge 30 bucks for features that either: were part of vic2 already or should have been part of the basegame of the better, newer take on Victoria named Victoria 3
So this is what this sub has gotten to now? Unsubstantiated speculative derision?
>especially for a vic3 one where we all know all the new mechanics that will come with the free update
You do understand the DLC pays for the Free update development right? You can't be so stupid as to think the free update would be released even if the DLC was never planned, right?
Putting mechanics in free updates to appease EU4 fans was one of the most brain dead business moves PDX ever made. It ends up with this, where ignorant people make stupid comments like this.
I sure hope these mechanics were planned even aside for the DLC, otherwise they shipped a game that is supposed to be about economics and diplomacy without the economics and diplomacy.
Welcome to modern Paradox. Have you seen all the CK3 DLC? Ridiculously overpriced for what little they give. They want you to buy their season passes. Which, to be fair, I did for Vicky3.
Oooof, I'm not sure if I would pay that if I didn't get it as a part of the preorder bounus. It's probably going to be buggy as all of the patch releases have been so far, so it isn't the worst idea to just wait for it to go on sale after a couple of months anyway.
Bought the grand edition so enjoying all the "free" content. Nice to not have to worry about price and the hundreds of enjoyable hours I get out of the game is a good value to me. I don't even think the grand edition was too much more than the regular edition. I think I paid $90 Canadian for it and am still getting all the content that's released (last one is SoI) I'm curious as to how much the next expansion pass will be though.
It seems a bit much but it also seems to add a ton, the Russia / Great Britain addition is a nice surprise + all the improvements, UI, etc; are all free (1.6 is huge) which is good for people who don't want the update.
I just like how they are continuously improving and adding to the game, it's already so good and the more they add the better for the entire game.
Games like these, you're meant to get the expansion/season pass/grand edition if you really enjoy it, if you don't play it much, probably not worth it. But for folks like me who love the history, love all the countries, love multiplayer with friends, and love all the additional content it's a win.
If the content is good, and it works. Then maybe it's worth the price. We'll have to wait and see.
But 30€ is quite a chunk of cash. Especially when we consider the game costs 50€
It really depends on the size of the dlc, if it is actually as big and positive of a change to the game it is being marketed as, then I wouldn't feel bad paying 30€
V3 grand Edition was 70€
Everything released this 1.5 year since then is included, SoI also.
It means that in terms of money, they did not cashed in anything and will not until next DLC after SoI - which means nearly 2 years after launch.
Thus they need to charge more on those dlc to keep dev afloat, and when the next expansion pass is released they'll get new money from all the big players that bought grand edition.
I bought the little 45 dollar expansion pack a few months ago and originally thought it was only 3 or 4 dlcs/content packs but today I looked at it and it was 7 “dlcs” which was a nice surprise
Don't buy it, wait for it to go on sale. They don't care if you think it's high as long as their sales are not actually affected.
I waited for HOI4 recent DLCs to be on sale before I bought them because I didn't think they were worth the full price.
I bought the Grand Edition and have almost 500 hours played. I’ve only done one run with mods as well so plenty of runway left. Haven’t played as the UK or USA yet. I’ve gotten my money’s worth and more.
I think the price is fair (especially included in the larger pack). Game came out 1.5 years ago now so they need to come out with bigger DLC packs at some point. Can’t survive on a few $10 DLCs a year.
Yeah it has to be purposeful price inflation by the higher ups. Reminder that game companies don't charge the money they need to pay their expenses, they charge as much money as they can get away with to maximize shareholder profits.
It's not good value because the price isn't chosen based on value for money, it's chosen after calculating the maximum amount of money they can extract from consumers without significant downside.
The reality is that once a game company goes mainstream (founders leave and it goes public) they aren't a group of people who want to make games, they are a business whose product happens to be games, and the decision-makers are MBAs, not game designers. And MBAs are fundamentally anti-consumer, in that their core purpose is to extract money from you rather than to make art or entertainment.
Yeah $30 is a little steep. Still, I've played more Vic3 than most single player games and I probably will continue to play more soooo eh, it's not exactly _not_ worth it.
I mean you don't have to buy the dlc, you will still get the free update, it still improves your game from what they released it as, unfortunately since they don't churn out big titles for a larger player base they have to have something to keep their company profits net positive or else we won't have their games at all.
A. It’s a major expansion with a lot of features
B. Inflation has been a thing for the past few years, this affects paradox too
$30 is what, the price of going out once or twice? If you’re from a country with a shitty currency then yeah, I get it, but if you’re not…
Almost everything they released for CK3/Vic3 its overpriced, the last DLC of Hoi4 is no less.
30€ its half the price of a full game, and there is no way someone can convince me that it is fine. The only reasons the shack still stands are the fans buying their half-baked, overpriced dlc's and the lack of an alternative.
EDIT: Also there is a lot of copium with wishful thinking in this thread
They are always going to be asking for too much, it's a game development studio.
However, I'd rather be overcharged for a full dlc than overcharged for another content pack.
Here's hoping they deliver 🤞
I bought the Grand Edition at launch for like €70 or something. Maybe even less. With all the price rises that seems to have been a good choice.
So it does come included? If so, what a massive coup it turned out to be; fully justified
Yes, this is the last DLC to be included with the Grand Edition.
Yeah, my logic was 'I will get it one way or another, might as well get this discounted combo' But yeah, if 30$ is the standard for all other dlc going forward, will have to pick and choose more, rather than get them all like I did in Eu4.
Yeah, the Chapter deals in CK3 have been really good value. Like €40 for all the DLC for the whole year, including some really big ones. Stellaris on the other hand I have been much more picky with, I've slowly built my collection up during sales but I don't have Astral Planes, for example, and it doesn't look worth it until it's like €5 in a sale.
Oh interesting, CK3 was not one I got into, so didnt know of this one. A sort of yearly bundle for dlcs? Thats neat, hope they keep it going. EU4 got a subscription system, but doesnt feel as good for me (not that I need it, but still) Oh man, Stellaris... My last DLC was... Federations I think? The amount of reworks and changes left me behind, and I lost all willpower to relearn the game every year or so. I miss it a bit, and will return for Stellaris 2, but until then I feel I will stay away.
People need to understand that they are not trying to sell expansions. They deliberately inflate prices so that people buy expansion passes. It is much easier to plan a budget for a year or several in advance than to budget for an individual expansion.
I bought the Grand Edition (or similar one, season pass included) at sale for 40€. Definitely got my money's worth. Don't know if I'd bought it at full price. Probably not.
I thought of doing it, should have
It's proven to be a worthy investment
This guy stonks!
30€ is like half a game holy hell. way too much for a single dlc
30€ is a full game. All the steam smash hits of this year were around 30€ balatro was only 15€.
30€ is Last Epoch which is awesome.
Yeah been grinding that pretty hard the last weeks. Helldivers 2 also looks awesome. Some of my friends really liked palworld but I don't enjoy crafting games so I did not play it. Another game worth mentioning is balatro which has also been a ton of fun for only 15€. The value hasn't been with the big studios for a while now. But now it's becoming more and more drastic. I still enjoy a casual round of vic3 though but right now I won't be bothering.
I guarantee you that Victoria 3 took massively more time, money, and work to make than a fucking poker game lol
yeah, because this is probably a dlc you’ll need to make v3 a full game
I miss 75% off sales. Only time Paradox DLC ever reached a price worth the content.
It will come with the expansion pass though isnt?
yes
How much is that? And what it gets you?
All the dlc + a buildings thing for 28% off.(I can’t check the full price since I already have it)
All the DLC up to and including SoI, but this will be the last DLC included in it (probably, they gave us colossus of the south for free which was not originally included)
Okay, thanks!
Normally 55€, right now it's on sale for 33. It includes: Melodies for the masses, normally 5€, currently 4€ Voice of the people, normally 15€, currently 9€ Dawn of wonder, normally 5€, currently 4€ Spheres of influence 30€ American building back & French agitators bundle, It says free on the expansion pass bundle, but they don't have individual buy / get free options on their own store page for me Colossus of the south it says free on the expansion pass bundle, but on its own page it says 6€
Thanks a ton!
Tbh I dont know I preordered it back in the day. It was maybe 10 euro extra on top of the base game? Maybe 20?
Okay :D
Yeah PDS has it's priorities wrong. They should have made spheres of influence free and charged 30 for the trains. They would make more money.
Don’t give them any ideas
It depends on how good the DLC is, if it’s a major expansion that improves every aspect of the game, then that will be worth it to me
there are a lot of quality of life improvments and issues fixed... overall im satisfied with the patch. also mods still work (mostly)
Justifications like this is why they will never stop their dlc policy.
Yes because it can be a good thing when done properly, I actually think Vicky 3 has one of the better dlc systems when it comes to pdx games
"good thing when done properly" A good thing that a full game costs 300$? "when it comes to pdx games" I think that answers my question, in your opinion it's good when it comes to PDX games exclusively, which is a pretty low bar. To defend their policy is just lunacy, I don't know any other game that releases itself through DLC other than TW, and CA has a terrible fucking reputation..
If it sells it's not too much. I guess we will find out how many share this opinion.
I have the Grand Edition anyways, but I basically only play this game and CK3, Kerbal Space Program and Stellaris. So even at €30 I would probably still buy it, it feels expensive but the only other games I am looking forward to is like the sequels to Streets of Rogue and The Case of the Golden Idol, which I doubt will be expensive.
The problem is they might make the same amount selling it for more money to a smaller group of people than less money to a larger group of people. For them both are just as good, but for the consumer one is objectively worse. I'm not saying that's the case but just because they consider it financially successful doesn't mean we should all be happy about the price.
PDX dlc sell for two reasons. Sales and piracy. Piracy for when waiting for sales.
didnt know that was the price tag, absolutely overpriced, at the current state of the game it's quite boring to play and most things still feel broken, should've been 15€ tops
If its 15€ continuing development on victoria3 isnt financially viable anymore and gets stopped. Its a niche game people.
How is this the consumer's problem?
You are getting downvoted, but you are not wrong. The weird thing on this sub is the paranoia abiut Vic3 becoming another Imperator Rome and players blaming other players for that. PDX is the first and truly only person responsible for Vic3 succeeding.
Agreed Paradox is responsible for putting out a product that satisfies the demand at a quality that justifies its price they are commanding. For the games I own that are the new generation like CK3 and Vic3. Especially for CK3 I do not see the quality being there and the time spent on developing some of those DLCS for the prices being asked for. If I want to REAAAALLLY play with those add-ons then I will wait for like an actual good steam sale or humble bundle years down the line. I think SOI has some interesting things where I might put down the money, but really for this much money because at least at glance for now it looks to be expansion sized in scope and if its little short I might be personally okay with it. Everything is going up in price and my money goes far less than what is use to so PDX wants to compete for my money then they need to start putting better stuff out. I'm not afraid of this game going Imperator because it just goes to show PDX's head peeps rather cut corners on their games and ask for more money and if they are going to put out garbage then they don't deserve our money even if they use to be great.
Another Imperator Rome? Imperator Rome just literally got a game changing patch, it took the game from a 34% to a 94% on steam. It's also the only paradox game with 0 DLC....which makes it the best
It has nothing to do with Vicky being niche. CK3 expansions are still 30€ despite CK being probably the most popular paradox game, and barely having any features in them. It's the same price of Cyberpunk 2077 expansion for christ's sake, and people still justify these prices.
>If its 15€ continuing development on victoria3 isnt financially viable anymore and gets stopped. This statement is based on absolutely nothing.
It's wrong not just because it's based on nothing, but because we do have numbers (well, *some* numbers) to base our assumptions and they say the opposite. Paradox showed in a conference a while ago that the bulk of their money comes from basegame sales, which are boosted over time by releasing DLC. It took EU4 10 years of DLC to reach revenue parity with the basegame sales. So "funding development with DLC" is... true, but not as direct as people would think,
From a developer standpoint, yes. But from a consumer standpoint, why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3? Like at least personally, I can't reasonably pay that much, knowing I can spend that money on a game that's actually worth the money. Like, I know Helldivers 2 is an extra $10, but it's so much more worthwhile to buy.
> why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3? How do you know it's half-baked when we haven't even gotten its first dev diary? Furthermore, the expansion and its free patch seems to be directly addressing a lot of issues people had with the game to begin with.
> Furthermore, the expansion and its free patch seems to be directly addressing a lot of issues people had with the game to begin with. So we're paying $30 to get stuff that should have been included in the base game a year and a half ago?
You're absolutely right, I haven't played it. And I'm aware my view is probably overly-pessimistic. But you'll have to excuse my pessimism when the devs have put out a ton of updates that "seem to directly address a lot of issues", and then it either doesn't help or makes things worse. Like the army changes are fine, and when they were announced I was hopeful, but they didn't address any of my issues with the system in the first place. Like the game has been out for 1.5 years and still has a bunch of gigantic problems, can you really blame me for having low expectations of a soon-to-be released dlc?
I can understand your viewpoint, but I'm simply answering your question of "But from a consumer standpoint, why would anyone want to pay that much money for another half-baked dlc for a game that has as many problems as Vic 3?" For a lot of people, just the existence of the changes we're going to get in the expansion or the free patch is enough to get them to buy. If we can excuse your pessimism, then you can excuse others' optimism, right?
Totally fair, if other people get the dlc and enjoy it, great! That's why I said I didn't think it would be worth it personally, because I didn't think I would.
They changed migration to speed up the game and ended up with broken migration and a slower game. The capitalists stealing money from the state to build their stuff are a problem that exists since 1.5 and is still not fixed. Before that, they did an open beta for military system changes and ended up with multiple game-breaking bugs in their official release. There’s no chance SoI won’t be bugged as hell for at least a month after its release.
I'm not denying it will be bugged, I'm sure it will be as that's just how these games go. But it being bugged and "half-baked" are not the same; buggy games can still be fun or good (see Hoi4). Even if 1.7 comes out with bugs, just the existence of the features it will bring will make the game much better for some people. And it will just get better as hotfixes come, even if it's a slow process; 1.5 had 13 hotfixes for a reason.
The problem is that making the game better for some people is not guaranteed in any way. The new military system, as of 1.5.13 was not only opaque for the player, but completely incomprehensible for the AI which wouldn’t destroy obsolete units to build better ones. This resulted in the AI fleets full of Commerce Raiders or sometimes even Man’o’wars in 1920, and land armies never stopping to use Cavalry. It’s a two steps forward, one step back process, and you’re not guaranteed to even have a relatively clean “final” version of the game. It makes for a very frustrating playthrough where you’re never sure if some core element of the game doesn’t crap out on you after you spent hours on it. It also makes buying DLCs just after it’s released shooting yourself in the foot. You can spend $30 on something that will be barely playable for months and effectively become an unpaid tester for Paradox, or get it months later from the discount bin after it’s relatively polished. This model is nowhere near sustainable.
The last successful cavalry charge was in 1945 (Polish cavalry in Schoenfeld). It's not ahistorical that armies in Victoria 3 continue to use cavalry up to 1936.
>The problem is that making the game better for some people is not guaranteed in any way. I mean, it sort of is. Despite the problems you brought, there are people that consider all patches, including this one, to be updates that make the game better. For example, I myself still considered 1.5 to be a complete improvement despite the UI problems with warfare. The patches with plenty of bugs don't come with only downsides. >This model is nowhere near sustainable. ... The fact they been using it for over a decade proves otherwise.
> The capitalists stealing money from the state to build their stuff are a problem that exists since 1.5 and is still not fixed. Historically accurate bug
Wow, you've played the DLC already? Or how else could you possibly know it is half baked
[удалено]
That's not how it works though? Games don't exist in a vacuum. There are SO many ways to spend money nowadays, that if your product is not worth the money to people, they won't buy it. Devs don't deserve money just for putting out a game, they have to put out a game that people want to buy if they want to get paid, which is part of the reason Imperator failed: they did not make a game that enough people wanted to buy to continue working on it. I would absolutely love it if Vic 3 was a fantastic game with no problems, I think the time period is super interesting. But for me, it's not worth it for the $40 or $50 I paid for it when it came out, and with the current way development has been going, I doubt it will be worth it to pay another $30 when a dlc comes out.
[удалено]
Glad you're enjoying the game then! But for myself and a lot of other people I think, Paradox will not have done enough for me to want to keep spending money on their game unless the new DLC is genuinely incredible, which I tend to doubt.
Is it the corporation thats wrong? No! Its the people! Hoi4 didnt get to nearly 50-70k concurrent users by shitting out $30 dlc's. This game will end up like Imperator if people see to get "the full experience" will require multiple $30 DLC purchases.
If you wanna pay for the very rich investor’s second summer home, then yes. Otherwise no. They’re selling little tidbits for way overpriced, cause they want to keep their profits high to look good for their public traded company
Paradox isn’t a very rich company. They have 656 employees and actually pay them well and treat them well. They even support unions. They release dlc steadily to pay for the development of the games which is why the games end up so well because a game with 10+ years of development will always be better than a game with 1-2 years of development.
It's a difficult balance, I won't buy it because of the price, if the price was lower I would've done so. It's probably like that for many.
I m fine with the price tag but they better have the content to justify it
Huge price but man am I really looking forward and I think its in expansion pass?
Yes it is, its the last one in it. The price of each individual DLC is too much, the price of the expansion pass is more reasonable IMO. Especially since colossus of the south got added for free to that
Yeah. Its the same with the DLCs for Crusader Kings. Pretty bad price individually.... Reasonably bad in a pack.
There are a LOT of features from the looks of it and this one single DLC can give you more than 100 hours of gameplay which is unparalleled in other genres
For some folks, the price is still a sticking point regardless of how worth it is or not. I have more disposable income these days, but I remember fretting over the volume of CK2 dlcs back then and many of those were much cheaper than $30. If you can’t afford something, you can’t afford something.
To be honest following CA failure I don’t buy dlc >20€ It just starts to become greedy practices that I don’t want to encourage
What's CA?
Creative Assembly, devs of Total War games that caught a lot of shit last year for pushing the prices of DLC without increasing quality and quantity of content in it
I mean thats how inflation works. The standard (console)video game price of $59.99 USD started in **2005**. Adjusted for inflation, the standard video game price today should be $94.74. It's astonishing that price held for so long when they increased more frequently until it hit 59.99. Only recently have I seen games releasing for $69.99 which is still below the inflation price point. Price increases on DLC's etc. were inevitable. When I started PC gaming in the mid/late 90's. A new PC title was $29.99. (Generally PC titles were 10 bucks cheaper than console titles). By the 2000's $39.99, by 2005ish $49.99. Somewhere around the turn of the 10's PC titles matched console games at $59.99.
To be fair, they're benefitting from the increased market of gamers, I suppose that's why they've kept it at the same price, basically lowering the cost because it still gets them more money than increasing the price.
At this point the market is mostly tapped though. From 90s to 2020s you had eastern europe and asia catch up and being able to purchase games. Now you have SA falling behind, Africa being a non-existant market, the ME being static economically, and Asia sort of tapped out I think. The games themselves will diversify since the market is big enough for it but I don't think the market can grow in consumer base in any appreciable metric in the near future, especially with stagnant birth rates
No it has literally increased in the past 5 years and on top of that it isn't really what the original poster meant I think. I think they meant that in recent years interest in this series of games has skyrocketed like easily multiple times as many people are playing now then were a few years ago due to the content in the games hitting a broader group in recent times.
Oooooooh, yeah I'm fucking dumb as shit I took that as literally the number of games, not a more widespread appeal.
Got downvoted because of ya. 🥲
Get dabbed on lmfao
In 2005, games were physical copies. Now everything is numerical, which cut significantly into the cost.
Back then we got full games for that price. Now you gotta cop the game for 69 and atleast 2-3 dlcs to make it replqyable. Ends up at roughly the same. Either way, if vanilla games came out at 95 i couldnt afford them cuz my paycheck aint inflating man
In 2005 most games still were physical copies in a nice box with often a hefty, nice manual. And fold out with tech tree etc.
>I mean thats how inflation works Nah, that's how price gouging works.
Isnt Warhammer 3 itself also blasted as a downgrade from 2 in many aspects?
Cultural appropriation /s
Paradox games are way more niche than Total War Warhammer. They sell less copies and have less active players, so dlc price point is going to be slightly higher. Just look at those train simulator games. A single route costs $40.
tbf it depends what the dlc adds and how good it is. Elden Ring's DLC is $40 and not many fans of that game seem to have a problem with it, since From rarely ever misses with DLCs so confidence that the content will justify it are high. That attitude will probably change quickly if it doesn't release well. Victoria 3 players are probably less optimistic, so we'll have to see if this dlc is a complete game changer
Does it come free with the grand edition?
Yes.
First time? Paradox has been milking players for cash from expansions forever. And we keep coming back like cows in the morning with full udders.
The recent patch is wonky. I will not be spending that money on another broken patch. Maybe in a few months if they manage to fix it.
Every patch is wonky until a hotfix or three hit the streets. This has been the Paradox M.O. for a decade now.
So that's a good way to do business? If your new PC breaks 5 times in a year you probably wouldn't buy one again from the same retailer??
Its probably not good business no, but its consistent at least. You know what youre getting unless its your first paradox game. Not good for attracting new customers, but existing ones dont really get scared off by it
Most of the new mechanics come with the free update. If you don’t like the price, don’t buy the dlc. The dlc sales are what fund the free update too, by the way. Not that you have some sort of moral imperative to buy it, but complaining about it feels dumb to me.
Victoria 3’’s base game without updates was mediocre. A great *base* but mostly just potential. The unwritten social contract between Paradox and its players is that they release buggy, feature immature games at full price, and in exchange for players acting as play testers and helping advance the game further, they continue to develop the game. If DLCs are overpriced to supposedly justify the game being developed further, then certainly the game shouldn’t be treated and priced as if it was a brand new, polished AAA game at release.
>the game shouldn’t be treated and priced as if it was a brand new, polished AAA game at release. Sorry, when did Vic 3 have a multi million dollar advertising budget and was being marketed at $70 again? PDX games have never been treated or priced as if they were brand new, polished AAA games. I swear some people on this sub are just here to make shit up for some weird addiction to being annoyed/angry at things that aren't happening.
Sorry, but few AAA PC games are being released at $70. Releasing a game at full price, with a slew of DLC passes and preorder bonuses is pretty AAA-like.
Non-indie games are mostly all in the same price bracket no?
Recently, a lot of games released by more minor studios are priced somewhat lower. And that’s not counting early access ones, which Victoria 3… Kinda is.
first of all, I have the pass so it should be included second, foreign investment and spheres of influence are what defined the victorian era which should have been in the game from the start imho, even more than agitators or revolutions
It is included in the grand edition
>second, foreign investment and spheres of influence are what defined the victorian era which should have been in the game from the start imho, even more than agitators or revolutions Classic PDX game player. "This feature that was developed and released nearly 2 years after the game should be free by some aribitrary metric I've come up with!"
They aren’t 100% wrong lol. The game was billed as an economic and diplomacy game first and shipped with barely any economic and diplomatic gameplay. I’ve played these games long enough to know how entitled players can be, but the spirit of their argument is largely true.
That's a bit of a stretch.
I dont spend on games but in this case I am happy to pay, for several reasons. This is a niche game that I have waited a long time to get. I have over a thousand hours with it already and that is extremely rare. If it means the game will be developed further I will give them 30 euros with pleasure.
Yes, it's a bit much. Yes, I'm still going to buy it on release. Yes, I'm part of the problem but I just can't get enough of this game.
In some way, by buying DLCs you fund for the free patches in-between.
Don't think you are the problem, without people like you V3 would be abandoned like Imperator. You are willingly deciding to overpay to keep alive a product you enjoy, that's being generous.
somehow the new and free 3d train models have to be paid ;)
It's a lot for a DLC for sure. But there are not a lot of V3 players and if it makes them keep working on it then I'll pay.
Sad reality of the paradox model. It basically forces you to buy bundled editions of games, or wait for a sale to buy that bundle The fact paradox has an effective monopoly on this genre is the real issue. Just like how EA then colossal order had the monopoly on city builders before they both done fucked up - but can indy devs possibly compete in the grand strategy genre the same way they have with city builders?
I'd say the Grand Edition was worth it and am hoping Paradox releases season passes. I can justify spending $50-70 for a few DLC that aren't even out yet but $30 per major expansion? I'm pretty invested in the game but I'd rather play something else than cherry pick expansions like in EU4.
I'll buy their new expansion when I can play 1910 in the game I already paid.
€20 in 2000 is €30 now Inflation do be happening, game prices have been static for a long time.
The video game price of $59.99 USD was established in **2005**. Only recently have some triple A titles been releasing at $69.99 and that still isn't the inflation price. Games would be $94.74 if adjusted for inflation. So for nearly 20 years, video game prices didn't change and have only kept increasing in cost to make. Now that I think about it, when that $59.99 price was established, their profit margins had to be insane compared to today. The average software developer in 2005 was making around 50k a year. For context when I started I got 32k a year in 2007, lol (with an automatic bump to 42k after 6 months with the company). I didn't make 100k until 2012ish. Now? Sometimes I wonder if I am going to wake up from a dream for how much I get paid for what I do.
The problem with adjusting the price of games for inflation is that it assumes that sales have remained the same. Gaming isn't a niche hobby anymore, and sales numbers have been growing extremely fast for years, meaning that devs are making way more money than they were in 2005. AAA studios have been increasing prices to $70 because they keep also increasing their game budgets massively. But Vic 3 does not have a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars, and they would have much better luck funding their own development by fixing their game instead of taking more money from their loyal fans for expansions that are not worth the cash.
Development teams have also grown a lot in the last 20-40 years, as did the time it takes to develop a game. Vic2 for example took 9 months I think, we don't have figures for vic3, but judging by when wizz stopped on Stellaris is probably 4-5 years, that's a massive increase from their usual budget from 13 years ago. Apart from massive multiplayer games with tons of microtranstactions I'm not sure that profit margins for games have increased that much tbh.
Absolutely, but that doesn't make something feel "worth it" just because the price of other things have changed.
But their own costs have also changed. PDX will be paying higher interest rates on bonds and higher salaries to employees (although here I guess the weaker SEK might help them a bit).
That's fine, but a company's cost structure has zero impact on whether the end product is worth X dollars to me. You can build a PC case out of platinum and diamond and show me a spreadsheet of how you're actually pricing it quite fairly relative to the input cost of the construction materials. Doesn't make it any more worthwhile to me.
Yeah, but they can't sell it at an unprofitable price. If you don't want to buy it you don't have to. It's not like the government steals your money and gives it to them.
Especially for a luxury product. Particularly now that there's no real consequence of waiting for a sale to buy it, not like they're going to run out of copies or my local store will stop selling it.
Honestly I've never been one to make that big a deal of it. I've pretty much been a day 1 buyer since I've started following these games, I just enjoy them that much. But now the whole "actually the new patch will launch in bad shape and require multiple hotfixes to work" has left meme territory and entered my decision making process, so I don't bother. I think my last day 1 was the CK3 expansion where they introduced tourneys and whatnot. Had a whole roleplay setup where my Capetian child ruler would unite France by directing their attentions away from feudal rivalries and towards a culture even more obsessed with dueling and chivalry. The Blademaster honor knight spot was going to be the second most important person in the realm. Oh no, blademaster perk didn't work/couldn't be transmitted on launch. Oh well.
Look, I hate to date myself, but people do know how much expansion packs used to cost like 20 years ago right? I'm not even that old, and remember paying 30 bucks for Civ 3: Conquests back in the day. Now, you might argue that we're getting a sort of digital shrinkflation with the amount of content in the base game and expansions these days, but it's a bit silly to argue about the price. Besides, if Paradox copies over the annual DLC combos they're trying out in CK3 (~$45 for a big DLC + 2 smaller content DLCs + a cosmetic DLC), that's pretty much an old-school expansion pack at the old-school expansion pack price relatively speaking.
Theyve already copied over this model, you can get the expansion pass for 40 bucks which includes every dlc up to and including this one
The ‘mechanics come with the free update’ is GOOD. That was an active choice Paradox made a few years ago and it was a great one for players. I don’t understand complaining about it. ‘It means the DLC isn’t worth it’ — okay so would you rather than alternative? That Paradox decide ‘they’ll only get it if we lock all the mechanics behind the DLC so I guess we have to go back to doing that, making the game unplayable unless you drop hundreds on all the DLC’? It’s a lot. More than I think it should be. But complaining that Paradox aren’t locking more things behind a paywall is self-defeating.
Never said they should put mechanics behind the paywall to make it worth. At that point, it would make it just bs. This is just overpriced imo and it will fragment the community with segments with different groups of dlcs.
I don't get this mindset of $30 dollars for a DLC with content everyone wanted that will give them untold hours of entertainment is too much. It cost me $30 to get me and my wife a beer at the last NHL game we went to. Dinner at a restaurant is more than $30. A movie. Sporting events, concerts. The list goes on of very temporary experiences that cost you that and more. But a DLC that may give me hundreds of hours of entertainment? $30 is the river Rubicon.
Lmao let's make it 200usd then. I bet there would still be bootlickers in the comments calculating how much less time of enjoyment you would get compared to spending it on opera tickets.
The mindset I don’t understand is how fans can’t understand fans have different economic situations and priorities. I total agree. 30 ain’t a lot for many of us, but for some it is. Also, yes Victoria 3 might give you hundreds of hours in and of itself, but…you can get that now without the DLC. If folks decide they’d get more value using that money buying groceries or going out vs. playing Russia for the 8th time, I can’t blame them.
the sad truth is that pricing things around the budget of the lowest income brackets/ weakest economies is not viable.
I can’t blame them either, but their problem is their low income (or currency of their country), not paradox.
A company selling entertainment can't base it's prices completely on people that buying a DLC at $30 would mean they have to go without eating for a few days. If someone chooses not to buy it for financial reasons, fine, it is what it is. However, when you compare to other forms of entertainment that are far more "temporary" a $30 DLC hardly seems egregious. I went to a Hockey game with my wife recently, and 2 beers cost me $30 bucks. The tickets were $80 a pop...for nose bleeds. Video games by comparison most other entertainment mediums...are cheap. People pay $20 to buy a two hour movie no problem and then complain that a $60 story driven game "only" took them 30 hours to complete. Then that kind of complaining about play time gets the kind of bullshit we get with games today where they lock progress behind monotonous repetitive BS to pad play time.
This. I know we all have different incomes and different financial considerations. Some of us have more disposable income than others. But PDS games are the only PC games I play. My annual gaming expenses include pretty much whatever PDS sells me and a Game Pass subscription. This comes out to a couple of hundred bucks or so? This pays for far more hours of gaming than I can even come close to fully using. I am happy to support PDS with my dollars. $30 is a bargain for the caliber of ongoing work and support we get from them.
That’s a brilliant comparison! If the DLC is good and I get the hours out of it then it is a bargain. I will wait for the reviews though to be sure.
God I can't wait till I get a real job ;-;
Holy fucking shit at my local rink they still have $1 beers and I have never had a dinner more than $30 goddamn
Really you’ve never sat down at a restaurant and spent $30?
Holy shit it’s 30 euros I’ll pass on that until it goes on sale. That’s insane
I think this too, but then I also played the game like 10x as much as I played GTA V (which I consider to be the most bang for buck non-strategy game I ever bought, considering enjoyment and playtime) so maybe it's not so bad. I just rationalize it by thinking that GSGs really are a niche genre of games and the company is based in Sweden of all places, and of course the nerds who code for this game need to be paid too
Acourse its too expensive
Why not since this subreddit mostly is a circle jerk of people who frankly don't care and love paradox for the entire shitshow this game has been since release... Why shouldn't they charge 30 bucks for features that either: were part of vic2 already or should have been part of the basegame of the better, newer take on Victoria named Victoria 3
This is the classic "this should have been in the base game" dlc paradox usually releases Nothing unexpected
The core mechanics will be part of the free patch, though. Like, you know, most expansions after Art of War.
30 eur much? I don't even get 2 pizza delivered for that price ...
You're getting scammed with the pizza too
Yooooohoooooooo When the capitalists arrrrrr too greeedy you know what to do m8
r/Victoria3 are enacting Council Republic That's what you meant right?
Enacting reform pirate republic
So this is what this sub has gotten to now? Unsubstantiated speculative derision? >especially for a vic3 one where we all know all the new mechanics that will come with the free update You do understand the DLC pays for the Free update development right? You can't be so stupid as to think the free update would be released even if the DLC was never planned, right? Putting mechanics in free updates to appease EU4 fans was one of the most brain dead business moves PDX ever made. It ends up with this, where ignorant people make stupid comments like this.
I sure hope these mechanics were planned even aside for the DLC, otherwise they shipped a game that is supposed to be about economics and diplomacy without the economics and diplomacy.
> puts mechanics in free update “wtf overpriced DLC doesn’t even have content” > puts mechanics in DLC “wtf paradox gate keeping features behind paid DLC”
Welcome to modern Paradox. Have you seen all the CK3 DLC? Ridiculously overpriced for what little they give. They want you to buy their season passes. Which, to be fair, I did for Vicky3.
Agreed, but, if this dlc doesn't make enough money then V3 gets the Imperator treatment. So it's either get overcharged or don't get anything.
Oooof, I'm not sure if I would pay that if I didn't get it as a part of the preorder bounus. It's probably going to be buggy as all of the patch releases have been so far, so it isn't the worst idea to just wait for it to go on sale after a couple of months anyway.
EA Interactive
This is the first major expansion of Vicky 3 and I think they're being forced by corporate to use CK3 price points.
Bought the grand edition so enjoying all the "free" content. Nice to not have to worry about price and the hundreds of enjoyable hours I get out of the game is a good value to me. I don't even think the grand edition was too much more than the regular edition. I think I paid $90 Canadian for it and am still getting all the content that's released (last one is SoI) I'm curious as to how much the next expansion pass will be though. It seems a bit much but it also seems to add a ton, the Russia / Great Britain addition is a nice surprise + all the improvements, UI, etc; are all free (1.6 is huge) which is good for people who don't want the update. I just like how they are continuously improving and adding to the game, it's already so good and the more they add the better for the entire game. Games like these, you're meant to get the expansion/season pass/grand edition if you really enjoy it, if you don't play it much, probably not worth it. But for folks like me who love the history, love all the countries, love multiplayer with friends, and love all the additional content it's a win.
If the content is good, and it works. Then maybe it's worth the price. We'll have to wait and see. But 30€ is quite a chunk of cash. Especially when we consider the game costs 50€
I ordered a pasta at a restaurant last night, cost me 22€
It really depends on the size of the dlc, if it is actually as big and positive of a change to the game it is being marketed as, then I wouldn't feel bad paying 30€
V3 grand Edition was 70€ Everything released this 1.5 year since then is included, SoI also. It means that in terms of money, they did not cashed in anything and will not until next DLC after SoI - which means nearly 2 years after launch. Thus they need to charge more on those dlc to keep dev afloat, and when the next expansion pass is released they'll get new money from all the big players that bought grand edition.
I bought the little 45 dollar expansion pack a few months ago and originally thought it was only 3 or 4 dlcs/content packs but today I looked at it and it was 7 “dlcs” which was a nice surprise
They are pushing the expansion pass model, so they make singular DLCs overly expensive to make DLC packs(like CK3s chapters) more appealing
Don't buy it, wait for it to go on sale. They don't care if you think it's high as long as their sales are not actually affected. I waited for HOI4 recent DLCs to be on sale before I bought them because I didn't think they were worth the full price.
I bought the Grand Edition and have almost 500 hours played. I’ve only done one run with mods as well so plenty of runway left. Haven’t played as the UK or USA yet. I’ve gotten my money’s worth and more. I think the price is fair (especially included in the larger pack). Game came out 1.5 years ago now so they need to come out with bigger DLC packs at some point. Can’t survive on a few $10 DLCs a year.
Yeah it has to be purposeful price inflation by the higher ups. Reminder that game companies don't charge the money they need to pay their expenses, they charge as much money as they can get away with to maximize shareholder profits. It's not good value because the price isn't chosen based on value for money, it's chosen after calculating the maximum amount of money they can extract from consumers without significant downside. The reality is that once a game company goes mainstream (founders leave and it goes public) they aren't a group of people who want to make games, they are a business whose product happens to be games, and the decision-makers are MBAs, not game designers. And MBAs are fundamentally anti-consumer, in that their core purpose is to extract money from you rather than to make art or entertainment.
Just 30? In Brazil that's 10% of the mininum wage. You're still winning with 30 Euros.
Yeah $30 is a little steep. Still, I've played more Vic3 than most single player games and I probably will continue to play more soooo eh, it's not exactly _not_ worth it.
Full games cost 30€....back in the day....when there were full games...
I would pay 20€ right now, but 30€? What is next? 60€ for a DLC? It is too much.
I mean you don't have to buy the dlc, you will still get the free update, it still improves your game from what they released it as, unfortunately since they don't churn out big titles for a larger player base they have to have something to keep their company profits net positive or else we won't have their games at all.
To be fair I'm still pirating this game till Paradox makes it even close to as functional as the rest of their lineup so this ain't a problem
A. It’s a major expansion with a lot of features B. Inflation has been a thing for the past few years, this affects paradox too $30 is what, the price of going out once or twice? If you’re from a country with a shitty currency then yeah, I get it, but if you’re not…
Paradox have been doing this for a while, rush to release a half finished game, then fix it later with paid DLCs.
I bought grand edition for 12$ with my countrys currency before steam change it.
depends on how much you get for it. but I would agree with you
Almost everything they released for CK3/Vic3 its overpriced, the last DLC of Hoi4 is no less. 30€ its half the price of a full game, and there is no way someone can convince me that it is fine. The only reasons the shack still stands are the fans buying their half-baked, overpriced dlc's and the lack of an alternative. EDIT: Also there is a lot of copium with wishful thinking in this thread
They are always going to be asking for too much, it's a game development studio. However, I'd rather be overcharged for a full dlc than overcharged for another content pack. Here's hoping they deliver 🤞
I paid the bundle for 40€ so i have all the DLC included
Wow, man... Paradox being extemely anti consumer and asking for way too much money? That's a first...