The audacity of DLC

[Renegrade]

17 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Also, explain how you have micro transactions without an "online model?" Or any online currency model for that matter?

You buy the microtransaction cards at a store, in card form.  You would not believe the wall behind the local pharmacy in my neighborhood (in Toronto, Ontario.  My US-style spelling throws people off of my Canadian heritage heh).  There's all sorts of crazy obscure stuff there (even cards for Wargaming Inc of World of Tanks/Warships fame, I think).

I'd also like to point out that Mr. Take Two said MAY not have such things, not that there will definitely be titles that won't.  Specifically the part where he says "It may not always be an online model, it probably won't always be a virtual currency model".   That's not an absolute statement and does permit for every game to have an online model and virtual currency (if they so choose).

Anyhow, I'm not opposed to DLC as long as it's a good solid addition to a game.  I believe the term 'expansion' was used in the first page of this thread to describe such a thing (and the upcoming DLC has been styled as such also), and I'd not be adverse to something like that.   Several somethings like that would be acceptable in fact.

I just wish any such profit would be going into Squad's coffers instead of Take Two's.  I can just see them cancelling (either specifically or via abandonment) KSP down the road because it isn't "profitable enough" -- a typical move for big companies.

(and if they offer me improved ISP on my lifting engines for only 350 golden spacebucks/roots/credits/whatever, I'll have my engineers invent a combustible lemon that burns their house down~)

[wumpus]

On 1/6/2018 at 12:25 AM, Snark said:

Thus my befuddled questions about why folks complain about things that, as far as I can tell, aren't actually happening and show no indication of doing so.

Except that it isn't Squad's game anymore and they aren't calling the shots, so any previous actions of Squad are pretty moot.  The game now belongs to Take 2, who has stated an absolute insistence for including such ways to pry money out of players. 

I'm equally befuddled by people complaining about lack of purchases of DLC that aren't even scheduled for release.

[Superfluous J]

9 minutes ago, wumpus said:

The game now belongs to Take 2, who has stated an absolute insistence for including such ways to pry money out of players

And the day they announce they're doing this in KSP, I'll care. not much, mind, but more than I care now which is zero.

I won't care much because it won't affect me. I'll either move on to a better game with less BS in it, stick with the version I have right now which is pretty great and has a license that allows me to keep using it even if they screw up future versions, or use the new version that has BS in it and just not buy the stuff. Most likely I'll try all 3 and stick with whatever works best for me personally.

[wumpus]

2 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

And the day they announce they're doing this in KSP, I'll care. not much, mind, but more than I care now which is zero.

I won't care much because it won't affect me. I'll either move on to a better game with less BS in it, stick with the version I have right now which is pretty great and has a license that allows me to keep using it even if they screw up future versions, or use the new version that has BS in it and just not buy the stuff. Most likely I'll try all 3 and stick with whatever works best for me personally.

I'd expect to try all three myself (presumably including buying at least "Making History" assuming it is remotely mod friendly and can be completed without additional purchases).  I bought KSP back in the .2x days (apparently just after the DLC cutoff, but I have no way to tell as I bought it from Valve) and bought on the assumption that the game had to be worth whatever Squad was charging (it was on sale) without additional development (while Squad had been steadily improving, plenty of other early access games have been busts).  Even so, after KSP hit 1.0 they are hardly required to do any additional development (those of us who remember cartridges and other pre-internet games certainly expected "what they originally ship is what you bought").  Anything since that is gravy, and I'm amazed at how far they have come.

The only real action this might have on my part is a slightly greater interest in archiving older versions (and compatible mods).  I recently noticed a copy of the beta edition lurking in an obscure directory and was pretty happy about it (I had thought that the entire souposphere+stable pancake rocket experience was lost).  As long as you have a version you like and the mods you want/need, you have an amazing KSP experience forever (well, that might require the Linux edition, don't expect Windows to maintain that type of backward compatibility).

[Melfice]

46 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

And the day they announce they're doing this in KSP, I'll care. not much, mind, but more than I care now which is zero.

I won't care much because it won't affect me. I'll either move on to a better game with less BS in it, stick with the version I have right now which is pretty great and has a license that allows me to keep using it even if they screw up future versions, or use the new version that has BS in it and just not buy the stuff. Most likely I'll try all 3 and stick with whatever works best for me personally.

Quote

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Edited January 7, 2018 by Melfice

[pandaman]

23 hours ago, Melfice said:

"Recurrent consumer spending" opportunities is fancy talk for "microtransactions".

You don't buy DLC/expansions over and over again (recurrent).

I take 'recurrent consumer spending opportunities' in this context to mean 'ongoing opportunities to buy stuff'. 

This 'could' apply to microtransactions of course, but it could equally apply to a series of much more substantial DLC/expansions.

True, I wouldn't buy the 'same' DLC more than once, but i would buy new DLC/expansions as they appear, if they appealed to me.

I don't see microtransactions as viable in KSP, i certainly wouldn't buy any.  But good quality expansions would be of interest to me.

[Superfluous J]

10 hours ago, Melfice said:

 

Please don't compare micro payments to the Holocaust.

[Fireheart318]

dead horse is unconscious horse. Just testing something...

Nope. How do I delete this now?

Edited January 8, 2018 by Fireheart318
plz delete

[Melfice]

24 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

Please don't compare micro payments to the Holocaust.

I'm not. But it doesn't make the poem less apt.

[Superfluous J]

1 minute ago, Melfice said:

I'm not. But it doesn't make the poem less apt.

Okay, if you think that not caring about micropayments is actual equal to or even remotely similar to not caring when people are rounded up and murdered, then at least read the entire post you quoted and bolded part of, and realize that what I was actually saying was that you don't need to care either because it doesn't affect you. You don't have to buy the DLC. You don't have to buy $.99 maneuver nodes. You can - gasp - stop and just keep playing 1.3.1, or 1.4, or whatever the last version was that didn't have all this stuff. And you won't miss out on any great content because I guarantee you, any great content would be behind a paywall as well. You'll actually be solidifying yourself with the best version of KSP there ever will be.

Here's a more apt poem, far more true to reality:
 

Quote

 

They brought out DLC, but I didn't mind because I like to pay developers for their honest work.

They brought out Micropayments*, but I didn't mind because I was capable of not spending my paycheck on garbage.

They murdered babies* and yeah you know what that's wrong and maybe I should notify the authorities.

 

*They haven't done either of these things, and there are no indications they will, ever.

[stibbons]

4 hours ago, Melfice said:

But it doesn't make the poem less apt.

It doesn't. But the massive hyperbole does.

[Guest]

Worth noting that KSP is published under TT's new label Private Division, which has also signed up a new (unannounced) RPG from Obsidian Entertainment. Obsidian has stated unequivocally that there will be no microtransactions in their game. I.e. Private Division is not requiring them from every title, at least. 

Source: https://forums.obsidian.net/blog/9/entry-207-a-note-about-microtransactions-in-our-upcoming-rpg

[OrganizedChaos]

On 1/6/2018 at 5:28 PM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Well, you can make multiple DLC/expansions.

Also, explain how you have micro transactions without an "online model?" Or any online currency model for that matter?

 

Shadow of War is a single player game with some slight on line components, but has a loot box system imbedded in the single player game.

https://kotaku.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-shadow-of-wars-controversia-1819293793

https://www.polygon.com/middle-earth-shadow-of-war-guide/2017/10/9/16434166/market-microtransactions-followers-gear-boosts-training-orders-garrison-bundles-silver-gold-mithril

Edited January 8, 2018 by OrganizedChaos

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Just now, OrganizedChaos said:

Shadow of War is a single player game with some slight on line components, but has a loot box system impeded in the single player game.

https://kotaku.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-shadow-of-wars-controversia-1819293793

https://www.polygon.com/middle-earth-shadow-of-war-guide/2017/10/9/16434166/market-microtransactions-followers-gear-boosts-training-orders-garrison-bundles-silver-gold-mithril

Not talking about single player vs. multiplayer; I'm talking about online vs not online.

If there is no "online model" or "online currency" that means you have to walk to a physical store to make the purchase.

As mentioned above somewhere, they do have "cards" you can buy, but I seriously doubt we'll ever see one for a game like KSP.

[OrganizedChaos]

whats stopping them from adding a currency to the game?  Why do you need a physical currency you can buy at a store?  I'm just not following you here.   After all isn't the only way to buy this game through online?

I'm not saying it's going to happen or even likely, but it's never out of the realm of possibility. 

Edited January 8, 2018 by OrganizedChaos

[Rocket In My Pocket]

3 minutes ago, OrganizedChaos said:

whats stopping them from adding a currency to the game?  Why do you need a physical currency you can buy at a store?  I'm just not following you here.   After all isn't the only way to buy this game through online?

I assumed we were discussing the aforementioned quote about T2's plan in general.

Are you asking specifically what's stopping them from adding it to this game?

Lack of exploitable population and/or a motivation for said population to purchase. This game is niche and single player, the only games where micro transactions are profitable are competitive multiplayer games with large populations.

Edited January 8, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[OrganizedChaos]

6 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

I assumed we were discussing the aforementioned quote about T2's plan in general.

Are you asking specifically what's stopping them from adding it to this game?

Lack of exploitable population and/or a motivation for said population to purchase. This game is niche and single player, the only games where micro transactions are profitable are competitive multiplayer games with large populations.

Oh I agree it's not going to happen,  but from how I took what you said it seemed like you didn't think it was possible.  I'll tell you, if I can get to Duna and back then anything is possible. ( I never thought It was going to be possible to do seeing how my first month of playing was going).

Edited January 8, 2018 by OrganizedChaos

[Hotel26]

On 2018/01/06 at 12:09 AM, Snark said:

I think what KSP did with their continuous-development model is brilliant.

Me too.  And it set a culture, as has been mentioned.

Squad took an approach that you could interpret as tentative, since it was a first game.  Squad pulled this off because it was also a long-held dream.  (Seems to me.)

What has also been brilliant (and not yet mentioned), is that, for the same reasons, Squad has cultivated and nurtured a HUGE community of FAN[ATICS] who have extended the game for the community for the love of doing so.

Squad have done this (I would say) by neither blocking nor subsuming user contributions.  They get to flourish.  Users get a huge range of choice about free, user-created DLC!  Squad has the helm of the ship and has set a direction, granted, and deserve credit there, too, but it has allowed huge latitude to independent developers and it has provided a decent plug-in architecture that allows a user to load a huge number of mods.  The internal architecture has allowed all that to co-operate and not fall over each other's feet.  In the main, I'd say; I only have experience with a paltry 4 mods. 

Under the circumstances, T2 need to be careful about attempting to extract money for DLC.  And when is something you love, "finished"?

Every great TV series/movie franchise has made a judicious decision about when to end, (even when the fanbase is still strong), or suffered for not doing so.  Nothing goes on forever.

I love KSP and my greatest fear for it is that a compulsion to keep extending it past its time will ruin it.

KSP started in one culture and I do not want to see it try to evolve into another...

Edited January 14, 2018 by Hotel26

[Hotel26]

To be clear, I'm not saying I think KSP has yet run its course!  (And that's up to the developers.)

Nor am I saying extensions from T2/Squad for a fee is something I am implacably opposed to; I am not.

I do want to continue to enjoy free access to updates to the backbone of KSP, since the history has been changes that are incompatible from the mod point of view.  Every KSP update necessitates waiting for and finding updates to the mods you like.

Paid DLC should not disturb the current user-contributed, free mod ecology.  That would be a clumsy move.

[Corona688]

On 1/5/2018 at 5:46 PM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

I think more-so what he's driving at, is that games used to be a more "complete" package when you purchased them. Since they were physical hard copies, and there was no infrastructure to patch or update; they had to be complete and almost 100% bug free from step 1. When you went to the store and spent 40 or 60 dollars on a game, you could be relatively sure it was complete and finished. Not really so anymore.

I remember those days.  They sucked.  Bugs still existed - we just couldn't complain about them.  Looking back on it, a few of my old favorites are almost unplayable by modern standards.

The instant publishers found an efficient way to publish patches, they did.  That's in part what the shareware revolution was about.  Also, expectations were so much lower - If a game didn't work, we'd blame our computer and move on.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Corona688

[Rocket In My Pocket]

21 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

I remember those days.  They sucked.  Bugs still existed - we just couldn't complain about them.  Looking back on it, a few of my old favorites are almost unplayable by modern standards.

The instant publishers found an efficient way to publish patches, they did.  That's in part what the shareware revolution was about.  Also, expectations were so much lower - If a game didn't work, we'd blame our computer and move on.

I'm not saying patches are a bad thing inherently, just that developers relying on them to "plug holes in the boat" later on instead of before release is a bad thing.

Quality control at launch has definitely gone downhill, the video game industry has seemingly adopted the "we'll fix it eventually" mantra...for better or worse.

What I'm saying here is that when you only get "one shot" and no take backs or changes after the fact, you are more likely to do it right the first time, and put your all into it.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[Corona688]

3 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

I'm not saying patches are a bad thing inherently, just that developers relying on them to "plug holes in the boat" later on instead of before release is a bad thing.

Quality control at launch has definitely gone downhill, the video game industry has seemingly adopted the "we'll fix it eventually" mantra...for better or worse.

No offense - you really don't remember what it was like in the day.  Computers were changing so fast that you'd buy a game and just have to hope it would work.  If it didn't, you'd return it, or upgrade your computer, or move around your memory & driver kludges until it worked.  This was normal.

This magical time when bugs were fewer and better-behaved only really happened for cartridges.  Even then, the bugs weren't quite as few or well-behaved as people rosily recall now.  People have been shrieking about their saves being eaten since saves were invented.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Just now, Corona688 said:

No offense - you really don't remember what it was like in the day.  Computers were changing so fast that you'd buy a game and just have to hope it would work.  If it didn't, you'd return it, or upgrade your computer, or move around your memory & driver kludges until it worked.  This was normal.

This magical time when bugs were fewer and better-behaved only really happened for cartridges.  Even then, the bugs weren't quite as few or well-behaved as people rosily recall now.  People have been shrieking about their saves being eaten since saves were invented.

I think we are talking about two very different "back in the day's."

I'm talking about console gaming in particular, computer gaming at the time wasn't very main stream, and me being just a child I obviously wasn't a hardcore early PC adopter. (I was like 4 when the original NES came out.)

Let me ask you this though: If you get one chance to take a test vs. as many attempts as you need until you pass...which test are you gonna study harder for?

[Corona688]

37 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

I'm talking about console gaming in particular

Exactly.  That's apples and oranges since PC gaming has never been that way.

Quote

Let me ask you this though: If you get one chance to take a test vs. as many attempts as you need until you pass...which test are you gonna study harder for?

Wrong question.  Try, "how long can you study before you run out of air"?  Console games are created on life support supplied by a big company like Nintendo or Sony -- Indie games have to publish or asphyxiate.  It's not a problem if you work for free.

A few big outfits like Accolade tried the console model on PC, but it turns out that

1. People don't ENJOY paying console-like prices for PC games
2. It's hard to get consistent results when your customers aren't using 100 million identical gaming units

So they had to lower their standards somewhat.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Corona688

[John FX]

On 04/01/2018 at 10:30 PM, Snark said:

the secret to success for any business organization basically boils down to:

1. Hire smart people.
2. Listen to them.

I am doing a start-up at the moment and these two items are the only things that really matter. Item zero though is finding the smart people in the first place...

When I bought the game in 2013 I bought it to take advantage of the cut-off point for permanent free DLC etc. I had not played the game but people were exited about it, it seemed like something I would like. This means paid DLC has publicly been a thing that would happen from at least early 2013. It's no surprise by now or shouldn't be, and from sales figures it seems needed.

The new content seems appropriate for a paid DLC. It has a theme (historical flights), it introduces new features(mission planner), and expands on what is possible in the game. I had initial doubts but as news has unfolded it seems like a nice add-on to the game and I am looking forward to it.

As a bonus it seems stock is getting some love too. We may even see mods with new features as a result.

 

EDIT :

On 06/01/2018 at 2:11 AM, Mako said:

(what's the plural for series)

Series.

It is the singular and the plural. The two series converged, for example. The series started with a 1, for another.

Edited January 16, 2018 by John FX