Is Paradox Publishing this as well?

[Karkarov]

Obsidian? A publisher? Well, I never...

 

Just kidding. They'll do just fine. This is 2017, after all - all the technology and marketing assets are right there at most of our fingertips.

Exactly.  All they need to reach the vast majority of their audience is GoG and Steam.  Both of those services will be happy to work with Obsidian directly.

 

Unless you are doing a physical release, or releasing for consoles which requires that physical release, you don't really need a huge amount of publishing power behind you.  Advertising may be more of a challenge, that we will have to wait and see.

 

Also remember, a big part of Fig's schtick is that they help you publish and allow people to "buy shares" of the game.

[Oerwinde]

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

[Archaven]

I would rather Obsidian focus on what they do best which is make quality cRPG games. In fact CDPR became successful for making games and not for publishing.

[Flouride]

I would rather Obsidian focus on what they do best which is make quality cRPG games. In fact CDPR became successful for making games and not for publishing.

 

Actually... Good Old Games is what made CDPR successful, they made money through that and were able to use some of that money on their own games which lead to even more success.

[illathid]

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

Edited February 1, 2017 by illathid

[Oerwinde]

 

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

 

 

Well, some of it is required to play... When EU4 switched to the development system for tax and manpower, all the provinces were stuck in low values, and you needed to buy the DLC to raise it, which meant pretty much the entire new world was 1/1/1 for the entire game.

[dark___devil]

 

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

 

Well i have a few thousand hours in EU4 alone and i can tell you that all of their new dlc expansions are shyte.They constantly add a new mechanics that break the game and the rest of the mechanics,the ai is brain dead because of all the new mechanics,the new ford system is broken as hell just like the pathfinding and don't forget the new tech system where the most advanced country in the world is ottoman empire.While there is still some basic bugs that are not fixed for years and some are even breaking the contend of a former dlc.Go and try to play the Purple Phoenix DLC and that is just small example,after all we are not in EU4 forum.

 

 

No on the topic.I don't think that Obsidian trying to go casual will end well for them in a long term.There is nothing wrong with streamlining the UI and the game but there is difference between streamlining and dumbing down.The Mass Effect went massive because they had really good roleplaying core (roleplaying is not maxing out a bunch of numbers).It will be good if Obsidian go self published but stay grounded.

[william14cnes]

 

 

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

 

Well i have a few thousand hours in EU4 alone and i can tell you that all of their new dlc expansions are shyte.They constantly add a new mechanics that break the game and the rest of the mechanics,the ai is brain dead because of all the new mechanics,the new ford system is broken as hell just like the pathfinding and don't forget the new tech system where the most advanced country in the world is ottoman empire.While there is still some basic bugs that are not fixed for years and some are even breaking the contend of a former dlc.Go and try to play the Purple Phoenix DLC and that is just small example,after all we are not in EU4 forum.

 

 

No on the topic.I don't think that Obsidian trying to go casual will end well for them in a long term.There is nothing wrong with streamlining the UI and the game but there is difference between streamlining and dumbing down.The Mass Effect went massive because they had really good roleplaying core (roleplaying is not maxing out a bunch of numbers).It will be good if Obsidian go self published but stay grounded.

 

 

I know it's past time of discussion, but there is some new development regarding Paradox pricing policy. Not only their DLC policy sucks, their pricing policy sucks as well. now to keep up with "growth of" purchasing power in this stagnant economy, Paradox has raised the prices of all Obsidian Games it publishes on steam by at least 33%. The base game of Pillars of Eternity now cost 50% more in poorer region like Russia, China, Brazil, etc. The ultimate version went up 66%. 

 

I m from China, so I know things are not good for ordinary Chinese. Pay remain relative the same compared to what was like 5 years or 7 years ago, while cost of living like food, water increase rapidly. 

 

I am a EU4/CK2/Stellaris player myself. I agree completely with your view on their DLCs.

 

I dont think this increasing the price of a game after 1year of its release is any good for sales.

[Fionavar]

Thread Edited: OBS does not tolerate piracy and/or its advocacy. Please consider whether posting in this regard is worth me flying down from the Roost, as I much prefer to be lazy ...

[Trogdor]

 

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

 

 

That is correct, but it aint perfect.

In the past when Paradox released an expansion, they abandoned their base game. So you were more or less forced to buy the expansions if you wanted an updated and patched game.

 

Now as you correctly state, the DLCs are voluntary, and the community still profit from new features and patching.

 

HOWEVER.... many Paradox games are now caught in a vicious patch cycle. A new DLC is released, which naturally introduced new bugs and balancing issues. However, instead of fixing these issues before they move on, they have started to implement these bug fixes in the next DLC. Which in turn introduce new bugs and balancing issues...  Crusader Kings II is a good example of this...

 

So either they need to start properly patching the games between each DLC, or they need to spend more time on QA. Regardless, the current DLC scheme is better than the old one. Hearts of Iron 3 without all the expansions is pretty much unplayable...

[injurai]

If I understand you correctly they tie bug fixes for existing content to pay for new content? And they don't push those patches out unilaterally? Hmmm. The grand strategy community is an odd one to reciprocate that model. I'd call them champaign socialists but the games seen to be more about imperialism and nationalism than anything else. Stellaris seems cool though I guess there is no point in buying a new game of theirs since the dlc is still coming out for it.

[Trogdor]

If I understand you correctly they tie bug fixes for existing content to pay for new content? And they don't push those patches out unilaterally? Hmmm. The grand strategy community is an odd one to reciprocate that model. I'd call them champaign socialists but the games seen to be more about imperialism and nationalism than anything else. Stellaris seems cool though I guess there is no point in buying a new game of theirs since the dlc is still coming out for it.

 

Well, you usually get a hotfix or minor patch shortly after to fix the most serious issues. But deeper issues are usually pushed back for the next major patch/DLC.

 

This worked rather well initially when they just had two IPs with the DLC model they were working on; Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis 4. However, with Stellaris and Hearts of Iron 4, it seems their team has been spread a bit thin. That aside, the Paradox community is one of the best out there, the "veterans" hang out at the Off Topic forum. As for getting the games, I find them a lot of fun, but I would probably hold off a couple of years before buying a new game. They usually need a few DLC packs and patches to find its stride.

 

Crusader Kings 2 I would highly recommend, plenty of role-playing options there. The Game of Thrones mod for it is excellent as well

[illathid]

 

 

 

 

Nope CD Projekt red is a developer before a publisher,their first game was published by Atari if i am not mistaken.Larian are self published.I hope that Obsidian goes that way,Paradox have some ****ty DLC practices and are very lazy.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry.

They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs.

 

 

I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not.

 

What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. 

 

 

That is correct, but it aint perfect.

In the past when Paradox released an expansion, they abandoned their base game. So you were more or less forced to buy the expansions if you wanted an updated and patched game.

 

Now as you correctly state, the DLCs are voluntary, and the community still profit from new features and patching.

 

HOWEVER.... many Paradox games are now caught in a vicious patch cycle. A new DLC is released, which naturally introduced new bugs and balancing issues. However, instead of fixing these issues before they move on, they have started to implement these bug fixes in the next DLC. Which in turn introduce new bugs and balancing issues...  Crusader Kings II is a good example of this...

 

So either they need to start properly patching the games between each DLC, or they need to spend more time on QA. Regardless, the current DLC scheme is better than the old one. Hearts of Iron 3 without all the expansions is pretty much unplayable...

 

 

I'm very familiar with the CK2 patching process (i'm the team lead for the geheimnisnacht mod). They usually release between 2 to 3 patches to fix bugs between every major content patch.

 

You can see that here: http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Patches