Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - DLC Survey

I like tons of DLC, but a lot of my favorites are for strategy games. It's a very different dynamic because you don't have the issue you have with narrative games of adding a tiny bit of new stuff to a game that's otherwise the same, and which I've already played.

My favorite RPG DLC are probably the Witcher 3 DLC. I barely played the DLC for a lot of others, like the Bioware games.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
I like tons of DLC, but a lot of my favorites are for strategy games. It's a very different dynamic because you don't have the issue you have with narrative games of adding a tiny bit of new stuff to a game that's otherwise the same, and which I've already played.

True it's usually just map packs, more units, or cosmetic updates. Though you do get more campaigns, or missions. So that's not always the case with strategy games.

So many fond memories of actually expansion packs not piecemeal DLCs. Some of my favorite RTS are the Command and Conquer games, and Supreme Commander.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
True it's usually just map packs, more units, or cosmetic updates. Though you do get more campaigns, or missions. So that's not always the case with strategy games.

So many fond memories of actually expansion packs not piecemeal DLCs. Some of my favorite RTS are the Command and Conquer games, and Supreme Commander.

It's not that they're not meaty, it's just an essential difference in how strategy games work relative to adventure/RPG games. DLC for games like EU4 or Endless Legend/Space expand the systems and content of those games. They don't add 2 hours of discrete gameplay somewhere in the middle or at the end of it. I never really feel like replaying 40+ hours of an RPG so I can get to 2-6 hours of new stuff. Strategy games are made to be replayed.

There are multiple types of ecosystems. In flight simulators like P3D, FSX, X-Plane, DCS or IL-2, DLC is actually the main content of the game, but it's often published by 3rd parties. It can quickly become very expensive, there are airplanes, missions, airports, sceneries, planning tools, tutorials, … Crazy world.
Didn't put that in their survey though, don't want to give them bad ideas

Completed the survey. Nope, i am not on board with the idea of episodic DLC's. My DLC's ideal is about the size and the quality of the old expansions, be it add-ins or add-ons (some of you are probably old enough to remember the differences).

The only game that had episodic DLC's that actually worked fine (at least that's the one i know of) is the original Dishonored. The other that i know of were left unfinished or in a poor technical state, so i am not a fan of the concept.

Aside from Honest Hearts, the Fallout New Vegas dlc could be judged as episodic. But I imagine there was a great deal of planning that went into them even during the primary's game's design doc.

Originally Posted by Redglyph
There are multiple types of ecosystems. In flight simulators like P3D, FSX, X-Plane, DCS or IL-2, DLC is actually the main content of the game, but it's often published by 3rd parties. It can quickly become very expensive, there are airplanes, missions, airports, sceneries, planning tools, tutorials, … Crazy world.
Didn't put that in their survey though, don't want to give them bad ideas

It's kind of insane. I like playing the truck simulators by SCS, and my interest in those led me down the path of being aware of other similar sims. The Train Simulator games are egregious. Thousands and thousands of dollars of DLC of this train or that route, all priced at like $30 each for a few hours of gameplay, gameplay that is almost identical to the gameplay in every other $30 DLC because you're on a freaking linear track… all power to those who are into it, but it boggles my mind, even before taking into account the predatory DLC pricing.

Originally Posted by Drithius
Aside from Honest Hearts, the Fallout New Vegas dlc could be judged as episodic. But I imagine there was a great deal of planning that went into them even during the primary's game's design doc.

It might have been episodic but each release had a beginning and an end. What usually happens in episodic releases is the DLC feels unfinished and you have to wait.

Similar to the TV reference with the to be continued at a later date. I hate that.

Originally Posted by Drithius
Aside from Honest Hearts, the Fallout New Vegas dlc could be judged as episodic. But I imagine there was a great deal of planning that went into them even during the primary's game's design doc.

Could you expound on this? To my recollection, Honest Hearts, Dead Money and Old World Blues were all very separate, entirely unconnected things. Only Lonesome Road was any kind of continuation of a previously existing storyline.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
It's not that they're not meaty, it's just an essential difference in how strategy games work relative to adventure/RPG games. DLC for games like EU4 or Endless Legend/Space expand the systems and content of those games. They don't add 2 hours of discrete gameplay somewhere in the middle or at the end of it. I never really feel like replaying 40+ hours of an RPG so I can get to 2-6 hours of new stuff. Strategy games are made to be replayed.

True again.

Still getting developers to make RTS games like Command and Conquer is almost impossible. They want to skip resource gathering, base building, and the campaigns.

The final nail in the series was EA wanted to make it online and become a service.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
Could you expound on this?

Episodic in regard to Ulysses' and your own backstory, all coming to a head in Lonesome Road.

In the survey I listed Blood and Wine as my favorite DLC.
Beautiful setting, 30 hs of gameplay, over 90 quests, your own vineyard.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
It's kind of insane. I like playing the truck simulators by SCS, and my interest in those led me down the path of being aware of other similar sims. The Train Simulator games are egregious. Thousands and thousands of dollars of DLC of this train or that route, all priced at like $30 each for a few hours of gameplay, gameplay that is almost identical to the gameplay in every other $30 DLC because you're on a freaking linear track… all power to those who are into it, but it boggles my mind, even before taking into account the predatory DLC pricing.

Haha, yes, sometimes it looks outrageous. Wasn't the train simulator by Dovetail (which also tried to enter the flight sim business)? But I can understand how the trap works, people who are passionate about trains just can't say no to owning the next locomotive, because they know it intimately, they've dreamed about it when they were kid (hell, we probably all did) and have books on it, now they can see it in 3D, and they can drive it. I've been there for planes, so I can more or less relate, fortunately I'm picky and took a lot of time learning each of them, so it was under control.
It's easy to get the collector bug though, so better to be on one's guard

Originally Posted by Arahael
In the survey I listed Blood and Wine as my favorite DLC.
Beautiful setting, 30 hs of gameplay, over 90 quests, your own vineyard.

And it's intended to be played after the main plot.

Originally Posted by vanedor
Honestly, I have never been a big fan of buying DLC. By the time they are released, usually the game is already on the shelf and I don’t feel like restarting a new game just to see a few new features. I might buy them if they are in a special edition combo with the full game, however, if I’m late at playing the game.

same here, and i just finished kingmaker yesterday. perhaps in a year or so