Full game or split game?

[PointOfViewGun]

Your (implicit) argument is of this form:

CA makes extra content.
The content is optional.
Therefore there's no point evaluating its quality.

The point of those criticizing CA on the other hand is that evaluating the quality of the content in this case matters.

CA makes extra content -- ok
CA makes extra content and asks for money for it -- ok
CA makes extra content and asks for too much money for it -- not ok
CA makes poor quality extra content and asks for money for it -- not ok
CA makes poor quality extra content and asks for too much money for it -- not ok

In this case they are evaluating two things: an action, and a practice. The action of asking for money for low-quality content, and of artificially asking for too much money for content, and the practice of engaging in those actions, practice which reflects badly on those who engage in them.

Nothing I said indicates that. Not a single thing.

Everything you just said, pretend you didn't say it. Pretend no one has ever said anything. Okay, great, good starting point here.
Mods are not content that CA provides for free. Modding tools are content that CA provides for free. Mods are created by other people.
DLC is content that CA creates, and they charge for it. By and large, the majority of it is of lesser quality than mods.
Here is the crucial part that you are amazingly still not understanding. I do not care about the fact that they charge for DLC. I care about the fact that the DLC is poor quality. I have never cared that they charge for DLC, I have never talked about "A", you misunderstood what I said. Which I have said, repeatedly.
You do have to pay for DLC. You have to pay for DLC. Like, you have to pay for food. You have to pay for gas. Obviously, to anyone who speaks English, that does not mean they are literally forcing you to pay. That means that, in order to acquire the good or service we are speaking of, you are required to pay a sum of money. Yes? You understand that people have to pay for certain things if you want them? Are we clear on what we're talking about now?
CA makes some good DLC, at least relative to other DLC. CiG was a good enough campaign DLC, added a new map, and seasons, and all sorts of other things. FotS, or Kingdoms, were great expansion packs, that added too many things to list.
I did not mean literally stealing, as in putting on mask and carrying around a bag with a dollar sign on it. Stealing, as in taking from other unit assets and mixing them together to create a new unit. Not impressive.
Do you only speak in pure, literal semantic terms? Are a robot? Is English your native language? That is a genuine question, because you seem to be misunderstanding basic figures of speech.
And with your last statement, I think we come to the crux of the matter. You see CA making poor DLC, and you think, "Well that sucks, I don't want that." I see CA making poor DLC and I think, "Well, you guys can do better than that."
I would rather pay for Fall of the Samurai quality expansion packs, than get Daughters of Mars quality unit packs for free. Since they insist on charging for basic things like unit packs or faction unlocks, things that modders are perfectly capable of doing right now at this very moment, I want them do at least make those things as high quality as modders make them.
Okay, just to reiterate.
We have to pay for DLC if we want DLC.
We do not have to pay for DLC if we do not want DLC, but obviously this is irrelevant to the conversation.
We do not have to pay for mods.
I, and many people around here, and many people in general at least according to Steam reviews, consider modders to make higher quality content than CA DLC.
I, and, I assume, many people around here, have accepted that DLC is a part of basic video game business now. Great, I love the idea.
I, and I assume, many people around here, wish that CA would create higher quality content, rather than not creating higher quality content. I would purchase the DLC if the DLC were good. I want the DLC to be good, because these games would be much better with good DLC.
Yes? No? Are we in agreement? Better is better than not better, right?

I am in agreement that you are ignoring what you initially said and ignoring what I've been saying to say all this. You did care about them charging for a DLC when you initially argued that they're insisting on making you pay for a DLC. You've been ignoring or misrepresenting pretty much everything I've been talking about that so far. I don't think you need me to quote that. You used the word "stolen" for its negative connotation to have a meaningless attack. Everything they can ever use to add new stuff to the game is a reuse of already existing material (code, tools, etc). Arguing about that makes as much sense as me telling you that you're stealing words from other people to use here. What they do is not stealing even in this idiotic sense you're using right now. You're not just telling us that they can do better. You're telling more and you're whining about it endlessly as if there is even a little amount of value in what you say about it. As long as you don't acknowledge that they're not insisting on making you pay for DLCs I don't care about the rest. I care about what I argued against, not all your tangents that you created to see yourself as right on a matter. I don't care.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Literally inventing something to argue against.

You literally just told me what I cared about. You literally just told me what my position on a matter was so that you could argue against it.


Just for kicks, here's the first thing I posted in this thread, which I thought did a perfectly good job explaining my point.

Modders could do better. Better unit packs, better campaign packs, better factions.

They can't, for some of those, for a number of reasons. But they could, given the ability, and that's why I am disappointed in most of CA's current DLC. Take Skyrim as an example of this. Skyrim has no DLC, only full expansion packs, because trying to compete with the gigantic modding scene would be pointless. I would much prefer such a scenario with Total War games, where they leave small things to us, new units and new factions, or cultures, or whatever, which they focused on large-scale, game-changing expansions.

That's not necessary, but what is, I feel, necessary, is if they are going to throw tons of tiny DLC at as, can they not at least put forth some effort into them? I want units that I couldn't mod in, which creates even more assets for modders to use to make even more units! I want really new factions, unique ones like nothing else on the map. Doesn't even have to be realistic! Indians, coming West, or Aztecs invading, or Chinese! Or, I don't know, demons! Just something that isn't, "Gaul Tribe Number 2: With a new spear unit made from assets pulled from other spear units!"


If Bethesda wanted to make clothes DLC for Skyrim, I would expect some damn good clothes DLC. Much the same, if CA insists on making me pay for bundles of units, I at least want some awesome, unique units.

Want to see the magic part you are misunderstanding?


"Much the same, if CA insist on making me pay"

Watch this, this will blow your CPU.

"Much the same, if CA insists on charging for"

They mean the same thing. Don't worry, it's an easy mistake to make. Maybe next time though, pay attention when I say that you're misunderstanding me, and don't try to claim that I am misunderstanding me.

[PointOfViewGun]

You literally just told me what I cared about. You literally just told me what my position on a matter was so that you could argue against it.
Just for kicks, here's the first thing I posted in this thread, which I thought did a perfectly good job explaining my point.
Want to see the magic part you are misunderstanding?
"Much the same, if CA insist on making me pay"
Watch this, this will blow your CPU.
"Much the same, if CA insists on charging for"
They mean the same thing. Don't worry, it's an easy mistake to make. Maybe next time though, pay attention when I say that you're misunderstanding me, and don't try to claim that I am misunderstanding me.

I merely referred to your own words. Get mad at your own words, not me. You seem to be still missing the difference in search of, wait for it, literally inventing something to argue against. Charging for something and making you pay have two extremely different meanings. This isn't a grammar lesson. It's basic and common sense. That, however, isn't the entire picture. It's actually quite a minor point. You're still telling me that they're insisting on it, as if such DLCs are your only option, when they provide the tools and the medium for there to be many other free of charge material for you to use. At best, for you, you're trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. I never accused you of misunderstanding you though. I always argued against your point A (that CA is insisting on making you pay for their DLCs) while you tried to argue in defense of your point B (that you want higher quality DLCs). That's how it started. Then you made some more nonsensical points which I criticized for the lack of logic and sense you use. I've pointed out how you ignore your own words and how you ignore what I've been arguing. The result of a cesspool we see above is your deflection tactic that grew into old age, which is why its smelling.

FYI: If you fail to say anything new I won't be responding next time. You can refer to my previous posts for information.

[DavidtheDuke]

his is the attitude that I have a beef with. You don't have to pay for anything. It's all extra content. If you find it low in quality or expensive then just move on. If you guys don't get that simple fact than you will argue about it endlessly for no valid reason.

I really don't think it's because people think they HAVE to pay. I think it's a bit of a tension in that they love TW for the mods and sometimes buying DLC is required to use the mods properly. I only buy CA's stuff many times as the skeleton for mods to put meat on the bones. It's not really that expensive to me and they should see what people charge for train simulator DLC if they wanna see overpriced. It's kind of a janky situation but that's how it is. Probably the best thing for TW would be real competition, but the field is too small.

I do think some people here do literally think CA is extra horrible for doing what other devs do, but I think you're just lumping everyone in together saying they're arguing one thing when they really aren't. They're trying to be constructive to CA to make more meaty DLC. I think it is kind of ineffective actually myself, CA's higher ups like Heaton probably won't change anything and could care less if people keep buying Beasts of War.

In this case they are evaluating two things: an action, and a practice. The action of charging for low-quality content, and of artificially charging too much for content, and the practice of engaging in those actions, practice which reflects badly on those who engage in them.

To actually stop the practice though people gotta stop buying the DLC, which apparently enough of a apparently silent or grumbling-while-forking-over-cash majority is doing.

[PointOfViewGun]

I really don't think it's because people think they HAVE to pay. I think it's a bit of a tension in that they love TW for the mods and sometimes buying DLC is required to use the mods properly. I only buy CA's stuff many times as the skeleton for mods to put meat on the bones. It's not really that expensive to me and they should see what people charge for train simulator DLC if they wanna see overpriced. It's kind of a janky situation but that's how it is. Probably the best thing for TW would be real competition, but the field is too small.

I do think some people here do literally think CA is extra horrible for doing what other devs do, but I think you're just lumping everyone in together saying they're arguing one thing when they really aren't. They're trying to be constructive to CA to make more meaty DLC. I think it is kind of ineffective actually myself, CA's higher ups like Heaton probably won't change anything and could care less if people keep buying Beasts of War.

To actually stop the practice though people gotta stop buying the DLC, which apparently enough of a apparently silent or grumbling-while-forking-over-cash majority is doing.

The most constructive thing starts with not exaggerating stuff and talk as if CA is raping your entire family so that they get a better understanding of what's wrong with those DLCs. It's rare to find criticism of CA and their practice's that's not more than what it really is. The least harsh criticism here still talks as these DLCs are forced upon people to buy them. The next important step is to not buy them. It's not like I bought all DLCs. I never bought a unit pack from CA. I checked them out, read the descriptions, watched the PR videos, then decided that it wasn't worth my cash. Period. My gameplay was not affected the slightest.

[DavidtheDuke]

The most constructive thing starts with not exaggerating stuff and talk as if CA is raping your entire family so that they get a better understanding of what's wrong with those DLCs. It's rare to find criticism of CA and their practice's that's not more than what it really is. The least harsh criticism here still talks as these DLCs are forced upon people to buy them. The next important step is to not buy them. It's not like I bought all DLCs. I never bought a unit pack from CA. I checked them out, read the descriptions, watched the PR videos, then decided that it wasn't worth my cash. Period. My gameplay was not affected the slightest.

Um, okay, but we're saying here exactly what you're saying then. The DLC packs are rubbish. The people in this forum would like them to be better. I don't think Top Hat Zebra was really saying it was all that horrible and we're just raked over the coals, just that the unit packs are not worth it compared to mods.

Why do you even bother coming here if we're all so stupid and horrible? I don't see how you find this forum rewarding at all.

[PointOfViewGun]

Um, okay, but we're saying here exactly what you're saying then. The DLC packs are rubbish. The people in this forum would like them to be better. I don't think Top Hat Zebra was really saying it was all that horrible and we're just raked over the coals, just that the unit packs are not worth it compared to mods.

Why do you even bother coming here if we're all so stupid and horrible? I don't see how you find this forum rewarding at all.

As I said before, many times, that's not all that's been said. Sigh...

[DavidtheDuke]

As I said before, many times, that's not all that's been said. Sigh...

But that's what we're arguing (as far as I can tell) and that's all I ever got from it, not that we're literally forced to buy DLC (or even highly encouraged). Even if we were saying that, we're clearly not going to back down from it and you seem to agree the DLC isn't very good (at least enough to buy yourself in some cases). Do you have any interest in actually discussing what ways CAs could do to make their DLC better, or are you just going to keep saying "yeah well you said CA was raping your daughters so I don't care what else you want to talk about!"

Personally I think all DLC should add actual mechanics as, like you, unit packs are usually fairly uninteresting, and I've only ever bought them on big enough sales. This could change with W:TW though, as each unit might be much more unique. However I do think we'll see different greatswords unit packs etc with no difference in abilities. Do you think unit packs that add unique abilities (especially if you could use them for unit mods) would be worth it if they were cool enough?

[HigoChumbo]

edit: look like I was too slow.

[PointOfViewGun]

Setekh, I believe you are bypassing that most people here are actually fans who genuinely want that content to be good, so just telling them "move on" is not really going to solve anything, specially considering the lack of alternartives TW has.

edit: ok I'm this slow.

I'm a fan too, Since Shogun I. More so than most people here. I want to discuss what they can do better and how, not what a little evil corporation CA is that this place has become a haven for. "Moving on" doesn't mean you can't discuss the content anyways. I just want to bypass all the idiocy.

[DavidtheDuke]

I'm a fan too, Since Shogun I. More so than most people here. I want to discuss what they can do better and how, not what a little evil corporation CA is that this place has become a haven for. "Moving on" doesn't mean you can't discuss the content anyways. I just want to bypass all the idiocy.

That's clearly not working. We're all idiots here. You really never answered why you stick around. You have over 8 times my posts in a shorter membership time. Do you think we're suddenly going to start agreeing with you? What's the point? Maybe you could try talking about how DLC could better instead of just saying that's what you want to do?

Now, do you want to talk about how the DLC could be better or just say I'm a "CA raped my daughter" hater?

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

AMAZINGLY MISSING THE POINT, SOMEHOW, BAFFLINGLY

You can't possibly be serious.


Let me lay it out in the absolute most basic and simple terms I can possibly think of.

CA insists that you pay for DLC, IF YOU WANT TO OWN THE DLC.

Mods are not relevant, except as a base line measurement of quality, a comparison.

You cannot legally own DLC unless you purchase the DLC. Do you get it? Are we in agreement so far? Basics of economics and all that? You see people post things like that all the time, "You have to pay for the DLC" "Make us pay for the DLC" "Force us to pay for the DLC." It is a figure of speech, it does not mean that we are literally forced to purchase them. It does not mean there are no mods, quite the opposite. It means that, if you want the DLC, you have to pay for the DLC, whereas, if you wanted a mod, you could get it for free. This would be no issue if they focused on campaign packs, and expansion packs, or adding new mechanics or animations or models or whatever. These are difficult things for modders to do, relatively. But instead, CA also churn out unit packs, which are of lower quality, and inherently higher price (I.E charging anything at all) compared to mods.

Here is the crucial part, that you seem to be ignoring. I am not complaining that they charge money, I am saying that I want them to improve the quality of their DLC. That has literally been my entire point form my very first post in this thread, and just as I said, all you want to argue with is the semantics of a single figure of speech that you misunderstood. Because I want good DLC, because CA, for very obvious reasons, can do more with the game than modders can. CA can add genuinely new features, new assets, rather than reusing old ones.

No one has ever said that CA literally forces them to purchase the DLC. Nobody, on this forum or any other, has claimed that CA uses hypnosis, or some other sort of mind controlling device, to dictate their actions. Whenever you read a post that says something like that, stop for a second, and consider the possibility that you are misunderstanding what that person is saying, because I am 99% certain that in any context you might be, they are not saying that CA literally forced them to purchase their DLC.

[Abdülmecid I]

Personally I think all DLC should add actual mechanics as, like you, unit packs are usually fairly uninteresting, and I've only ever bought them on big enough sales. This could change with W:TW though, as each unit might be much more unique. However I do think we'll see different greatswords unit packs etc with no difference in abilities. Do you think unit packs that add unique abilities (especially if you could use them for unit mods) would be worth it if they were cool enough?

I completely disagree. For me, DLCs should add into the game very superficial stuff, totally unnecessary for the overal experience with the game. IMO, BoW was the best DLC of Rome II, as it was so useless and comical (not in very good way), that nobody, regardless of his addiction to TW, would ever need to buy it. Actual mechanics should be part of the main, as the opposite would mean that the customer is forced to pay an unreasonable amount of money to fully enjoy the complete game.

[scoicarius]

I completely disagree. For me, DLCs should add into the game very superficial stuff, totally unnecessary for the overal experience with the game. IMO, BoW was the best DLC of Rome II, as it was so useless and comical (not in very good way), that nobody, regardless of his addiction to TW, would ever need to buy it. Actual mechanics should be part of the main, as the opposite would mean that the customer is forced to pay an unreasonable amount of money to fully enjoy the complete game.

So you would actually want dlcs to be of marginal quality so that you're not missing anything by not purchasing them? Interesting perspective. A different perspective might look like this: since I'm paying for dlcs, I want to feel like I'm getting my money's worth, so I'd want the best quality possible, including new mechanics and whatnot.

One solution to satisfy both would be for those who purchase a dlc to get a discount when purchasing an expansion if the content of the dlc is completely included in the expansion. In this case getting a dlc wouldn't feel like a ripoff, but like enjoying some of the contents of the expansion early.

[PointOfViewGun]

So you would actually want dlcs to be of marginal quality so that you're not missing anything by not purchasing them? Interesting perspective. A different perspective might look like this: since I'm paying for dlcs, I want to feel like I'm getting my money's worth, so I'd want the best quality possible, including new mechanics and whatnot.

He didn't mention quality at all. He mentioned content/features and he's right about it. DLCs shouldn't be tools to add features and CA will likely continue to not use DLCs to add features.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I would also like the game completely free, but I feel like that is an unrealistic wish.

DLC should be a great way to drive the creation of new features in a game after it's release, much like how Paradox does. (With the DLC that aren't cosmetic, at least.) I mean, yes, it would be great if new features were regularly added for free, but CA clearly already has to justify simply providing basic support for older titles, let alone brand new, unique content.

Warhammer sounds like it has a great idea going for it, where each individual game in the trilogy will be a complete, self-contained game in it's own right, but combined, they will add onto each other with a bigger map, and, hopefully, new and improved features. That is what I want, big expansions, more so than DLC, but I digress a little.

Since CA are going to continue to make DLC regardless, I would rather they be high quality, and add unique things to the game. Not like, new diplomatic options, or a logistics system, or anything game changing like that, but something more like the Blood and Gore pack. Completely optional, completely unnecessary to basic gameplay, but also impossible (Or at least incredibly difficult) to add in with mods.

[scoicarius]

He didn't mention quality at all. He mentioned content/features and he's right about it. DLCs shouldn't be tools to add features and CA will likely continue to not use DLCs to add features.

Shouldn't? Who are you to say what should or should not be the case? When I pay for something I evaluate its quality, which is to say I evaluate the quality of the content of the dlc. For me personally new mechanics constitute quality content.

There's no right or wrong here. It's just a matter of preference.

[PointOfViewGun]

Shouldn't? Who are you to say what should or should not be the case? When I pay for something I evaluate its quality, which is to say I evaluate the quality of the content of the dlc. For me personally new mechanics constitute quality content.

There's no right or wrong here. It's just a matter of preference.

And its my preference that DLCs shouldn't be tools to add features. That is grounded in CA's past practices as well.

[DavidtheDuke]

I would also like the game completely free, but I feel like that is an unrealistic wish.

DLC should be a great way to drive the creation of new features in a game after it's release, much like how Paradox does. (With the DLC that aren't cosmetic, at least.) I mean, yes, it would be great if new features were regularly added for free, but CA clearly already has to justify simply providing basic support for older titles, let alone brand new, unique content.

Warhammer sounds like it has a great idea going for it, where each individual game in the trilogy will be a complete, self-contained game in it's own right, but combined, they will add onto each other with a bigger map, and, hopefully, new and improved features. That is what I want, big expansions, more so than DLC, but I digress a little.

Since CA are going to continue to make DLC regardless, I would rather they be high quality, and add unique things to the game. Not like, new diplomatic options, or a logistics system, or anything game changing like that, but something more like the Blood and Gore pack. Completely optional, completely unnecessary to basic gameplay, but also impossible (Or at least incredibly difficult) to add in with mods.

I would pay for a family tree to be added in Rome 2... I mean we're getting that Attila mod which basically ports DEI to Attila which is nice but we're losing Athens, Sparta, and the Syracuse is losing settlements.

And its my preference that DLCs shouldn't be tools to add features. That is grounded in CA's past practices as well.

And you haven't bought any unit packs. I'm guessing you bought the campaign DLC... which added features/mechanics as well as content? You're telling me your DLC preference is to not add features, yet you yourself said you haven't bought a unit pack? Maybe there was a non-campaign DLC you bought that wasn't a unit pack (what would that be?)? Or do you just like the content in the campaign DLCs? Would you really not have paid for a family tree feature to be added to Rome 2?

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I would pay for a family tree in Rome II. I would not be happy about it, but I would buy it on sale or something, as long as it included all of Attila's improved features as well.

Which is so unlikely I feel completely confident in saying it will never happen, but still, just as a hypothetical, I would buy such a thing, even though I think that sort of basic mechanics should have been in from the start.