Next DLC will be the Last DLC?

[MaxPeck]

This whole argument is kinda funny to me.  We're talking about $15.  The price of dinner for you and another person at Taco Bell.  A movie ticket (without concessions).  $15.

People will go out and plunk down $70 for the latest iteration of "Battleground Super Deathmatch XVII", or "Felony Carjacking Simulator: Imaginary California City" but somehow $15 for an expansion pack so the devs aren't living on ramen noodles and generic cola is too much?  It's $15, man.  Skip some Doritos and Dew this month and you're all set.

[majNUN]

All things considered, I don't mind buying DLCs as long as improvements to the base game continue. I bought KSP as early access, and when it left early access it still looked (and still kind of looks now) like it should be in early access. Sure the company needs to make money, but I'm pretty sure they've made huge amounts already - but where was it spent? New office decor? My biggest complaint is the severe lack of soundscaping in the game - the silence is deafening. But from looking at the advertisements used by Squad, they seem to heavily mod their own gaming experience to the point that it seems they've forgot what is really in the base game and what is not. Every time they release an update, I play vanilla to see what it's like, then I immediately search for my mods like an addict looking for a fix because reality is too harsh. Take away the mods and the game isn't that shiny. Admittedly, the DLCs polish a bit.

The game has been out for a few years, and I've seen some good mods and modders come and go. I don't think @linuxgurugamer (God grant you a long life!) can adopt and support all the mods when abandoned. Does KSP have the staying power of Age of Empires? Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing Kerbal Space Program 2 come out if it was done right. And I would probably pay for all the DLCs again - just ask Stardock.  (Not to mention that Maxis probably conspired with my daughter to empty my wallet twice - once for The Sims 3 and second for The Sims 4!) 

[magnemoe]

On 6/4/2019 at 6:24 AM, MaxPeck said:

This whole argument is kinda funny to me.  We're talking about $15.  The price of dinner for you and another person at Taco Bell.  A movie ticket (without concessions).  $15.

People will go out and plunk down $70 for the latest iteration of "Battleground Super Deathmatch XVII", or "Felony Carjacking Simulator: Imaginary California City" but somehow $15 for an expansion pack so the devs aren't living on ramen noodles and generic cola is too much?  It's $15, man.  Skip some Doritos and Dew this month and you're all set.

This, it cost money to keep developing an game. 
Last DLC will come then they are not economical to make. They will not focus on the base game simply as it don't bring money to the table. 
Yes they throw bones and some features are not practical to lock behind an dlc. 

So last DLC and KSP is dead unless they make KSP 2.0 down the line. 

[Mukita12]

10 hours ago, magnemoe said:

This, it cost money to keep developing an game. 
Last DLC will come then they are not economical to make. They will not focus on the base game simply as it don't bring money to the table. 
Yes they throw bones and some features are not practical to lock behind an dlc. 

So last DLC and KSP is dead unless they make KSP 2.0 down the line. 

Maybe yeah you're some what right, unless there's a compromise, KSP will be dead and squad may have to create KSP 2

 

[MaxPeck]

18 hours ago, Mukita12 said:

Maybe yeah you're some what right, unless there's a compromise, KSP will be dead and squad may have to create KSP 2

 

Welp, being as how on the main page of the forum there are “help wanted” ads for developers, I would say evidence speaks against KSP being dead.  Something tells me they’re still making decent money off of sales of the base game, with new players appearing on the forums on a regular basis.  Since KSP has worldwide appeal, as opposed to the regional market of most games, I’m thinking the number of people who discover and buy this game is probably in the 100s per month. Maybe that’s a somewhat liberal estimate, but given the size of the world and the mix of international players here on the forum, it wouldn’t surprise me. Now add in revenue from the 2 DLCs and something tells me Squad is doing just fine. If the game wasn’t still selling plenty of units each month, they’d be packing up and shutting down, not hiring more devs.  And the more content they add, the more DLC they produce, the wider their market gets.  I don’t see KSP being the kind of game that goes stale like most, because it’s literally infinitely replayable.  You can do literally anything you can imagine, from build ships and submarines to fly to other planets.  People play it as a science sandbox, a role playing game and the worlds silliest combat simulator.  KSP isn’t just a game, it’s a creative medium.  

Something tells me it’s going to be around for quite a while. 

[Spraki]

I won't get into the DLC rabbit hole, as I am not so proficient about them. Other than such being quite the scourge in the gaming world since, lol.

Excluding my blatherings...

Imo, the DLCs just need to bring some genuine features.

If the DLCs are truly attuned to being mini addons - say, bringing in such like an active airport, other AI commercial planes in the sky that take off and land at other airports, other Kerbal factions to compete against etc - then I think we wouldn't have to worry about last DLC worries. 

[Gavin786]

I think that there is one fundamental point that the OC has failed to grasp.

Developers need to be paid to develop software.  That money needs to come from somewhere.  And that somewhere is the DLCs.

IF they stop releasing DLC or people stop buying it means KSP development stops.  Full Stop.  That is the reality of the situation.

I love this game and am delighted to spend $15 on DLC, if only just to support the devs in making more of this game.  IF there was a "supporter pack" or upgrade that was cosmetic I would get that too, just to support the Devs.

For some people, especially kids and those in the 3rd world,  $15 is a lot of money.  But if it wasnt for these DLCs there would be no KSP. 

To ask the devs just to work on main game and not get any money in from DLCs is not a realistic position.  

I dont know what it is but am nonetheless looking forward to next DLC.  In my book both so far have been fantastic and added a lot of great stuff. 

Yes you can get a lot of that from mods, but I far, far and away rather things be in the core game than the mods, as I feel that is "real" gameplay and anything that fundamentally alters the nature of play is not for me.  And I have loads of mods none of which do that, all of which are informational or allow game input to be streamlined.

To be crystal clear about another point I loathe microtransactions or any "pay-to-win" mechanic.  It would completely turn me off KSP if it happened.  I loathe any game that has that and I just wont play it.  Cosmetic items are fine, but anything that changes the gameplay that has to be bought on a per-item basis I just cant abide and even though it brings more money in for me it would totally ruin this game.

Airships and Submarines would be a fantastic next mod IMHO and I would be happy to pay $15 God Willing.

Gavin786