- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
We re-re-re-re-re-re-re-released Skyrim once again over the last 10 years, it just doesnt have the same traction. It’s just that these audiences are only interested in a game for 6 months max.
Coming from the studio that gave us horse armour DLC.
Guild Wars entered the chat
Path of exile disagrees
minecraft and rimworld too
Same with Cyberpunk, Elden Ring, all of the dark souls games, The Witcher 3
Factorio: Space Age has entered the chat
Skill issue
Sell DLC that isn’t just a bullshit cash grab and people will buy it.
Literally Paradox’s entire business model…
Bullshit.
Was gonna say - how long after Elden Ring did Shadow of the Erdtree DLC come out?
The issue is doing DLC for an open world game is hard. The way it’s been done in the past is broadly one of the following:
- add a new zone that doesn’t interact with the rest of the world
- add a new location, a few new maps that link to the original zone and some quests The issue is that that’s not enough to necessarily make an entirely new playthrough worthwhile, but also an existing near-end save might trivialise loot and content.
The solution is so some combination of the following:
- Make the content spread throughout the world
- Balance the game so that new gear are choices rather than straight upgrades.
- Add new systems to engage with.
Fundamentally Bethesda as discounted the latter. It’s done with classes, it’s not added races, or new systems or new skills in years. They can’t add content throughout, that would require creating the space for the content to exist in ahead of time.
Not that it can’t be done, but that they don’t have the future awareness to make room for it.
He has got to only be saying this because Starfield DLC did poorly. The audience moves on if the game isn’t interesting. Personally, I buy all the DLC for games I enjoy. I don’t know many people that don’t either.
Had Starfield been contained to like a dozen star systems with way denser planets it probably would have done better. Its just too damn big. And BGS is scared to death to go for what everyone really cares about, the species that built The Armillary. Had they focused on that I’d still be locked in. I like the game. But its too big. They went all the way in on the “kill, loot, return” playstyle and neglected everyone else. I never cared about that shit. I hated it in F4. Give me lore, story, details, actual faction choices that actually matter.
My very first playthrough of Fallout 4 I sided with The Institute because I had plans to take over and free the synths. Imagine my fuckin’ surprise when the credits rolled. They lost the plot long ago. And if they don’t have a “come to jesus” moment and figure that shit out then ES6 might be their last game. Big Daddy Microsoft isn’t gonna keep humoring Todd and Emil. They want their goddamn money back and a cargo ship more as interest.
I just upgraded Alan Wake 2 to play the expansions, which are AWEsome. I played all expansions for Alan Wake and Control as well and enjoyed them a lot. Remedy is one of the few developers that I would play a game from on day one or even preorder. Bethesda, not so much. I can still remember being unable to play Skyrim for months on PS3.
Say that to CDPR and phantom liberty. If you make an actual expansion it can keep players interested. If it’s a new weapon or something then who cares
Factorio disagrees
gunfire reborn released each of it’s dlc packs ~1 year apart and i’ve bought all three. going on 4 years since initial release and the game still feels fresh as hell.
That’s true, IF AND ONLY IF the game in question has failed to retain players that long…
