TOW DLC Confirmed!

[Ethics Gradient]

While DLC has been expected by fans, official confirmation that it was in the works was just dropped quite casually.

Quote

The reception to The Outer Worlds has been unbelievable to see, and even just being nominated means a lot. However, the journey isn't over yet as we are excited to announce that we will be expanding the story through DLC next year! Details will be made available at a later date.

[Ommamar]

Cool I wonder where they will take the story.  I see two logical paths one to follow the thread back to see what happens to cause Earth to be cut off from Halycon, the other being to see what the colonists on the Hope are able to overcome the obstacles remaining at the end of The Outer World.  Maybe  we will get both as I think both would be good ways to go.  I am hoping that as part of DLC they implement a modding tool as I think that would really lengthen the longevity of the game.

[Theonlygarby]

Pavarti date #2 DLC hopefully

[Wormerine]

Excellent. An incentive to purchase and dive back into OW.

[uuuhhii]

hope for more indoor area

monarch are a little exhausting

[Rayburn]

Modding tools.
More Byzantium indoor areas.
Less "doodad" houses, more open ones with NPCs inside.
Maybe some mercenary missions you can pickup via your ship's computer, but that can honestly be left for modders to work on. Maybe provide them with a ready framework for that?
Oh, and modding tools!

Thanks, Obsidian. Really heartwarming.

[C2B]

Rebalance. More challenging game modes. De-Couple Supernova features from its difficutly if we want survival elements in lower difficulties.

[algroth]

1 hour ago, C2B said:

De-Couple Supernova features from its difficutly if we want survival elements in lower difficulties.

Or, alternatively, greater enemy/encounter difficulty without the survival elements.

[DekarServerbot]

so people who want it of steam gets a DLC as consolation prize? Sorry i can't forgive

[Ommamar]

21 hours ago, DekarServerbot said:

so people who want it of steam gets a DLC as consolation prize? Sorry i can't forgive

I didn't like how the game release was handled but what is the option?  "Since we didn't launch on steam no one gets any DLC."  Definitely fall under the it  is what it is category from my perspective.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Ommamar

[the_dog_days]

16 hours ago, DekarServerbot said:

so people who want it of steam gets a DLC as consolation prize? Sorry i can't forgive

I still don't understand why people love Valve so much.

[uuuhhii]

12 hours ago, the_dog_days said:

I still don't understand why people love Valve so much.

few care about valve since they basically doesn't make games anymore

but the hostile exclusive competition of all the store and every publisher pushing their own launcher are a nightmare to many players

[daven]

3 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

few care about valve since they basically doesn't make games anymore

but the hostile exclusive competition of all the store and every publisher pushing their own launcher are a nightmare to many players

Hasn't Steam had exclusives? Nobody seems to care about that. It's called brand loyalty and it's for suckers.

[Zoraptor]

Yeah, I mean what exactly do people think Half Life 2 was, other than a Steam exclusive designed to force people including those who bought retail to use Valve's new online game launcher? What was the last Valve game that didn't require Steam? Sheesh, they've trojaned steam into their pre steam products as well, imagine the reaction if suddenly Dragon Age Origins required Origin or CiVI suddenly required Rockstar Launcher to get updates.

People reward Valve for being first with the exclusivity and forcing them to use Steam first when- in reality- if you really hate exclusivity instead of just exclusivity that isn't Steam exclusivity you should hate Valve above all others for introducing, pioneering and popularising the concept in PC gaming... brand loyalty: it's a hell of a drug.

OTOH and more on topic, nice to see DLC actually confirmed. I'm not a 100% convinced fan of TOW as it exists now and I played on gamepass so am not likely to be buying dlc there for obvious reasons but TOW's got a very good base to build on for sequels or DLC.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Zoraptor

[ComradeYellow]

Great news!  Wasn't certain if they were able to due to publisher change but this confirms the green light.  Let's get tons of new content! and this is perhaps the first game ever where I'd be excited to grab it as it comes (provided the quality level maintains high).

[DekarServerbot]

On 12/15/2019 at 12:58 PM, the_dog_days said:

I still don't understand why people love Valve so much.

I don't love Valve, i hate Epic Games, that's the big difference.

[GhostofAnakin]

On 12/13/2019 at 4:41 PM, Ethics Gradient said:

While DLC has been expected by fans, official confirmation that it was in the works was just dropped quite casually.

 

DLC "next year".  I wonder if that means early in the spring of 2020 or well into Sept/Oct/Nov of 2020.

I kind of hope sooner rather than later because I tend to lose interest in revisiting games I haven't played in the past 6 months just to play the new DLC for it.  For instance, I still haven't played the DLC/expansion for Horizon Zero Dawn even though I loved the base game because it came out quite a while after I'd already beaten the game.

[DekarServerbot]

On 12/16/2019 at 6:56 PM, Zoraptor said:

Yeah, I mean what exactly do people think Half Life 2 was, other than a Steam exclusive designed to force people including those who bought retail to use Valve's new online game launcher? What was the last Valve game that didn't require Steam? Sheesh, they've trojaned steam into their pre steam products as well, imagine the reaction if suddenly Dragon Age Origins required Origin or CiVI suddenly required Rockstar Launcher to get updates.

People reward Valve for being first with the exclusivity and forcing them to use Steam first when- in reality- if you really hate exclusivity instead of just exclusivity that isn't Steam exclusivity you should hate Valve above all others for introducing, pioneering and popularising the concept in PC gaming... brand loyalty: it's a hell of a drug.

OTOH and more on topic, nice to see DLC actually confirmed. I'm not a 100% convinced fan of TOW as it exists now and I played on gamepass so am not likely to be buying dlc there for obvious reasons but TOW's got a very good base to build on for sequels or DLC.

 

I don't reward valve for being first, in fact, i had origin launcher years before after i got my first steam game. Also i hate FPS games, that's why i did not give a **** about half life or team fortress back in the time and still don't do. I had hardly touch my TOW copy since i got Disco Elysium and Antagonist on steam, plus another abandoneware game on gog

[dukeisaac]

On 12/14/2019 at 12:18 PM, C2B said:

Rebalance. More challenging game modes. De-Couple Supernova features from its difficutly if we want survival elements in lower difficulties.

Very much this. And perks.

[Wormerine]

On 12/16/2019 at 11:34 AM, daven said:

Hasn't Steam had exclusives? Nobody seems to care about that. It's called brand loyalty and it's for suckers.

They had 1st party exclusives, which I think is a fair thing to do. There were also "unnoficial" exclusives, like Firaxis games, which were playable on steam only due to its functionality. 

The big difference is that Valve didn't pay money to game makers to add some value to their platform: they themselves developed titles for it, and other devs flocked to it, due to its popularity/functionality. It's not impossible that devs didn't like having to use steam as much as players did. People dislike Epic as they feel they are not being dealt with - deals are made between Epic and Publishers/Devs, and customers have a choice of waiting for wider release or caving in. 

[DekarServerbot]

On 12/19/2019 at 5:17 AM, Wormerine said:

They had 1st party exclusives, which I think is a fair thing to do. There were also "unnoficial" exclusives, like Firaxis games, which were playable on steam only due to its functionality. 

The big difference is that Valve didn't pay money to game makers to add some value to their platform: they themselves developed titles for it, and other devs flocked to it, due to its popularity/functionality. It's not impossible that devs didn't like having to use steam as much as players did. People dislike Epic as they feel they are not being dealt with - deals are made between Epic and Publishers/Devs, and customers have a choice of waiting for wider release or caving in. 

or just dismiss them as they don't care about their consumers if they take that deal. I guess i should be exhalted because this news flash came in my b-day but all it does is putting salt into the wound

[Wormerine]

22 hours ago, DekarServerbot said:

or just dismiss them as they don't care about their consumers if they take that deal.

Well, there is no evidence to show that substantial amount of players won’t buy games on Epic. Games released there still sell really well, and with secured cash upfront and a better cut, it makes for a better business move overall. 

[waltc]

On 12/21/2019 at 4:33 PM, Wormerine said:

Well, there is no evidence to show that substantial amount of players won’t buy games on Epic. Games released there still sell really well, and with secured cash upfront and a better cut, it makes for a better business move overall. 

Evidence?  If there were such evidence it wouldn't matter at all since the publisher entered into a contractual exclusive agreement with Epic for a certain period--in exchange for whatever money Epic promised them to do that--so unless there's a specific clause stating otherwise, if Epic sold a single copy a week--just one--it would have to pay the publisher the promised amount, and the publisher would have to take it.  Such is the nature of this kind of nutty agreement.  I could see a publisher taking this agreement if he had little to no confidence in the game selling well--but I think it would be a mistake in the case of a really good game that should sell well everywhere.  In the case of a good game, then, ideally the developer would want to see it sold by as many reputable game vendors as possible, which would easily overcome  being paid by Epic to sell from a single source, regardless of what Epic paid them to do that.  People who buy games know these things--and are automatically suspect of any game Epic would have to finance partially, otherwise the publisher was running scared of it.   One month's exclusive for a game like RDR2 PC is OK and understandable because it gives them a month to "beta test" the game with Epic PC customers and whip it into shape for the general release 30 days later.  But a *year's* exclusive?  Holy cow, Batman, that's cra-zee...;)  That means that neither the developer or the publisher has much of an expectation of profit for that game--a year--man, that's almost too much dumbness to wrap your head around....;)

Ok, quickly, let's look at it another way: Pillars of Eternity II.  Feargus has been quoted complaining that the game didn't sell very well so he doubts anyone would want to publish a sequel.   There's just one problem with that, though.  PoE II, in the end, after a solid year of development after the first installment of the game shipped, when all installments were complete and the turn-based mode was also complete--was and is a truly excellent game.  I think it's first-rate--better than the original in many ways.  However...it was the release strategy of the developer, Obsidian, that killed the sequel, in my estimation.  What they did wrong:

1) Took almost a year to actually complete the game so that a player could play it through from start to conclusion--ie, the second and third installments of the game should have been finished before the the first installment shipped.  People don't much like serial movies anymore--same with serial games.

2) Turn-based mode--was great--had been asked for often for PoE.  Should have been planned from the start.  Game should never have been released without it.

It took almost a year post release to get the game ship-shape.  Simply put, the game was released far too early.  People like me bought and liked PoE OK, but I didn't like the episodic drip-drip-drip release schedule for the game--I honestly would not have bought the first installment of PoE when I did--but would have waited until they'd gotten it all finished and reasonably patched before buying it--would have enjoyed it a lot more!  So when PoE II was announced--no way was I buying into it early again!  I waited until 5.0, almost, was out--hence my very high opinion of the game.  But if Feargus and the guys aren't going to understand that PoE II was shipwrecked from the start because of the premature, unfinished release schedule of the game--then they clearly aren't going to address this kind of thing and may make these same mistakes in the future.

Challenge for Obsidian:  For God's sake do a PoE III--and bring the series back to the continent, please!  The ships were a nice diversion--let's not get lost in them, however...;)  This time, though, include turn based from the start and include all of the planned episodes in the first release of the game--all of them!  Then later, if you want, do a worthy expansion--in a year or two...;)  I'll bet it would be a walk-away best seller *everywhere* and not just from the Epic store--just putting it there is kind of insulting to some of us.

*I love Outer Worlds, btw.  Am playing via the Xbox PC thing through the Microsoft Store.  It's on sale now for a price I agree with with--~$45...so I will probably buy it tomorrow for Christmas!*  Would love to see a PoE III--but only if it's done right as mentioned above............!

[LadyLeela]

I Wholeheartedly wait for dlc or sequel to this Game/Universe. And add-ons.