Kingdom Come - The Future for Kingdom Come

Silver

Silver

Spaceman
Staff Member
Supporter
Joined
February 13, 2014
Messages
9,315
Location
New Zealand
Redbull interviewed Warhorse about the future of Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

...

What’s next for Kingdom Come: Deliverance?





Jirsa: I really have to say that our priority is to have the base game as good as possible. So we’re searching for any bugs that remain in the game and we’re fixing them. Other than that we have the DLC roadmap, so there’s already four premium paid DLC planned and five free DLCs. There’s lots to come – and if you liked the romance with Theresa, and feel it ended abruptly, you’ll be pleased.





Stolz-Zwilling: Our four premium DLCs are going to enhance the story. The first, From The Ashes, will see you taking care of a village. Second will be more story DLC, and the third involves soldiers, bandits and fighting, while the last premium DLC will be called A Woman’s Lot, and here we’ll be adding things to the game that didn’t make it into the original release, but were promised on Kickstarter. For example, a quest with one of the female characters from the game, and the dog companion will be in there, too.





Could a Switch port be on the horizon?





Stolz-Zwilling: Unfortunately not. The Switch port is not an option for Kingdom Come.





[...]
Click to expand...
Thanks Farflame!

More information.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
9,315
Location
New Zealand
Good interview but I say wait till all the DLC gets released to play.

Yeah I'm a bad gamer who doesn't support developers buying games at full price instead of the whole bundle later on cheaper. Just look at the latest PoE2 thread for reference.
Anyways, the point is that by waiting for support of a game to finish before purchasing, you're making it financially unprofitable to support the game at all.

Obsidian is spending a lot of time and money refining a game that few people bought, and arguably that time and money would be better spent on another project. If they buy into that argument, then the outcome is no new patches or DLC.

If you support developers improving their games after release, then you should support them at release. Not after two years when the complete edition is on sale for $15.
Click to expand...
That's sarcasm by the way on my reply not the quote that's from another member.:biggrin:
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,405
Location
Spudlandia
I go about 50-50. I buy half my games at release and half in Gold Editions. The studios that I enjoy I will support right away. Then there are a few games that I buy multiple copies and founder editions to really show my appreciation. I did that for Battle Brothers and Wasteland 2.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2010
Messages
2,862
Location
Wolf Light Woods
If you like a studio, don't wait two years to buy their games. That's all I was saying.

Several employees have already left Obsidian since Deadfire released. Presumably laid off. So yeah, it pisses me off how so-called fans didn't support them when it mattered.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Well obsidian has a history of poor money management. Anyway you keep saying support the company but the opposite is also true so if we don't like their business model than we shouldn't buy their product even if the game seems interesting.

Silver Coin said:
If you like a studio, don't wait two years to buy their games. That's all I was saying.

Several employees have already left Obsidian since Deadfire released. Presumably laid off. So yeah, it pisses me off how so-called fans didn't support them when it mattered.
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
Except nobody has a problem with developers adding more content after release.

I have a problem with people that use it as an excuse to wait until games are a fraction of their value, which hurts their favorite developers financially. It's unethical consumerism.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
You don't get to tell others what they like and dislike.

Silver Coin said:
Except nobody has a problem with developers adding more content after release.

I have a problem with people that use it as an excuse to wait until games are a fraction of their value, which hurts their favorite developers financially. It's unethical consumerism.
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
The argument presumes the consumer likes both the developer and game.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Silver Coin said:
Except nobody has a problem with developers adding more content after release.

I have a problem with people that use it as an excuse to wait until games are a fraction of their value, which hurts their favorite developers financially. It's unethical consumerism.
Click to expand...

Unethical consumerism? How so?

Unethical consumerism is when consumers purchases goods from a company they know is operating unethically. Such as paying unfair wages or having a poor working environment.
 
Ethical consumerism is just as much about rewarding businesses for good behavior, as it is punishing them for bad behavior.

When developers add more content updates into their games after release, that's a good behavior. When fans respond by not purchasing their games, it sends a bad message.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Silver Coin said:
Ethical consumerism is just as much about rewarding businesses for good behavior, as it is punishing them for bad behavior.

When developers add more content updates into their games after release, that's a good behavior. When fans respond by not purchasing their games, it sends a bad message.
Click to expand...

That’s great but you didn’t type ethical consumerism you typed unethical consumerism, which is why I was confused because that doesn’t make any sense.

If your changing it now , then ok.
 
Uh, no. I used the right term.

Failing to reward businesses for good behavior is as much of an abdication of responsibility as failing to punish them for bad behaviors. Both are equally damaging.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Silver Coin said:
Uh, no. I used the right term.

Failing to reward businesses for good behavior is as much of an abdication of responsibility as failing to punish them for bad behaviors. Both are equally damaging.
Click to expand...

That’s all irrelevant in regards to the actual definition of unethical consumerism.

saying obsidian is using unethical business practices and consumers are knowingly supporting them would be unethical consumerism.

It doesn’t really matter I was just curious what you basis for using the term was and it’s clear we’ll never ge there.

I get your point though, you think obsidian is great and therefore everyone should support them. If only it worked that way.
 
Ethical consumerism is the practice of voting with your dollar in support of your beliefs. Unethical consumerism is the practice of voting with your dollar against your beliefs.

If you want oldschool isometric party based CRPGs and post release content updates, then the ethical action is to support the few developers making those types of games at release. If you want those things but don't purchase at release, you are promiting a marketplace in which those types of games are discouraged. Therefore being an unethical consumer.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Weird inventive use of the terms of ethic and obligation.

For the record I have no ethical responsibility or obligation to buy a company product as long as I do not steal their products.

If they go out of business because people do not wish to buy their product that is because they chose to use a business model or provide a product that the market chose to not support.

I might feel an ethical responsibility to help the homeless or misfortune but that does not apply to capital ventures.


Silver Coin said:
Uh, no. I used the right term.

Failing to reward businesses for good behavior is as much of an abdication of responsibility as failing to punish them for bad behaviors. Both are equally damaging.
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
Interesting logic.

If you want a certain kind of CRPG - you have to support all iterations of that kind of CRPG including all business models, or you're discouraging that kind of CRPG?

How about we support the kind of games we want, and we don't support the kind of games we don't want.

Also, how about we support the kind of business models we want, and we don't support the kind of business models we don't want.

I'm pretty sure that's how it was supposed to work back when people thought Capitalism was a consumer friendly concept.

In the end, the consumer has the power because we don't need games as much as a business needs money - but we kinda have to apply our power to make it work.

Which is the problem, as consumers don't seem to agree about how to apply it in a way that benefits us all.
 
I agree with general point that if you like certain developer and the games they are making, then you support them and buy their games preferably at full price.

Now here is the thing, if someone can wait 2 years to buy a game and all its DLC, then it implies that, for this person the game nor the developer aren't worthy of support for whatever reason. So criticising these people is pointless.

I don't buy many games at release these days. I simply don't have enough time to play all the games in my backlog. Who is at fault here? Its not me! Its all the developers who are making too many games.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
That's no doubt true for many people, but I think some fans are just patient and don't consider that not buying a game on release hurts the developers.

In Obsidian's case, Deadfire's poor sales have most likely caused layoffs. I'm sure more people than own the game would be sad if they went out of business.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
866
Not buying a game at it's release when you know there will be tons of DLC coming later is sending a message. Messages are not saupposed to hurt anyone.

If a developer shmehow got hurt by such message, it's consequence of their choice not to deliver the full package up front while not planning a possible fail with first week sales caused by business that only alienates players in between because everyone has a different game installed.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Silver Coin said:
That's no doubt true for many people, but I think some fans are just patient and don't consider that not buying a game on release hurts the developers.
Click to expand...

Why are these fans patient? It simply means they are busy playing something else. If they are not playing something else then they don't value the game enough to play it on release day. This is a clear message to the developer from their market.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom