The games they release are complete in them selves, and with 15-20€ dlces every ~6 months they keep the games fresh with new content.

People rarely complain that features are missing from their games until it gets added in a DLC. Then suddenly it’s a mandatory feature.

  • Stamets@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    5 months ago

    Your last paragraph is just untrue. One of the biggest complaints is that they routinely lock stuff in a DLC that should be in the base game.

  • Tanoh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    5 months ago

    I don’t mind it either, they need some way to finance the development. However I wish they would make packs of older DLCs and sell those cheaper.

    For example in Europa Universalis IV you need a whole bunch of DLC, and buying seven 5 year old DLCs for full price is just not very appealing. Sure, you can try and wait for sales but they are not always available when you want to get them.

  • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
    1·
    5 months ago

    I think if you like the base game, and it’s your kind of crazy, the paradox model is great cuz you constantly get drip fed more of the thing you like.

    I think the paradox model is proven that paradox can buy a great game, and sustain it long-term.

    However, paradox because of their model is unable to make a great game in house. Every attempt they’ve made at a new game more or less fails completely. At least in the last few years

    So if paradox buys the game you love, great you’re going to get more content. But I don’t hold hope for paradox making a game for the love