just from memory:
latest stronghold expansion: 2.50 for an original fully voiced campaign
total war warhammer - the grim and the grave 6.99. gives you access to two new campaigns, several new units, new lord types, new maps
(yeah yeah, not less than 5, but you could split it in half and each half would still be way more content than this mess of a DLC)
for 3-5 eur you can buy full price indie games
the exact reason why i don’t go to the cinema
they told us this would be a campaign DLC. it contains no new campaign. I am disappointed
it’s insulting that they price it like this. I am angry
some people like having all the achievements. they are frustrated
Disappointment+Anger+Frustration = Hate
get it now?
Most likely yes they did
Well I’m content with it. I like standalone scenarios, and filthydelphia’s are always high quality. Only sad that so many of them are remastered versions of existing ones, but that is not something that can be changed today.
It is what it is. I’ll get my fair share of enjoyment out of it and that’s good enough for me.
Maybe it’s time to support the alternative market…
I released a new scenario today, just saying.
You don’t know that for sure. It’s possibly just delayed.
I predict the next DLC will be African, adding two South and Central African civs, the Shona and the Swahili, both with the existing African set of course. I wouldn’t mind that, as the African set is super underutilized.
Only way to improve it, make it free (unlockable in an event like USA civ in AoE3)
You’re telling me I could be playing my home country in AoE3 without paying a dime?
Yes it was unlockable for free by doing 50 tasks in an event. If you wished not to grind for it or missed the event then pay.
Well, my laptop is not up to the task of running the game anyway. Once I have an actual PC, I’ll play around on the game with the free to play version, and if I like it, I’ll buy it. Honestly, though, it’s not nearly as fun as AoE2, and much more complicated.
Because if it sells well, the devs will do this shit again. It’s a very simple concept to understand, all companies do this. If thing make money, then making more of same thing = big money.
This means that they’ll continue pushing out shitty DLCs like this one. And well, I kinda like this game, and I don’t like shitty DLC. So, shitty DLC in a game I like, is something I dislike. Makes sense?
In short, they’ll keep recycling free content instead of making new content. Which is, you know, better because it’s new, and not recycled free community scenarios. And that will end up affecting people like me, who prefer quality content over slop, because there won’t be anything “new” worth getting.
I’m pretty sure tasking an employee to make scenarios in the editor won’t take time away from bug fixers and testers, because those are completely different areas. And also, the extremely low effort that is this DLC is also a problem, because they’re charging quite a bit of money for it, almost as much as a full DLC. It’s not a good practice…
Honestly would add a real mounted samurai, give a free mod that utilizes hero skin for regular units and add unique castles for everyone. Probably the fastest change would be giving the Persians the Central Asian architecture and change the Slavs to Rus.
So they all took 3 months off vacation?
I don’t understand your logic.
You hate it because they reused some fan made scenarios but you also hate it because it apparently took so much time away from developers that they had to cancel a full DLC???
Yeah but it won’t sell.
Not nearly as much as a normal DLC unless people buy it on accident thinking it includes new civilisations. But then people will write bad Steam reviews leading to less sales.
The DLC will likely return the investment but only because the investment was small.
It won’t help the game growing so they will have to keep making normal DLC.
You simultaneously think it’s a bad deal but you are also afraid many people will buy it?
I won’t buy it for sure. I haven’t even played 90% of the current campaigns yet.
God I hope! But apparently, the majority of players are campaign-only, or at least quite a big chunk of the playerbase is. And the original idea was to make a DLC catering to this audience, without having to deal with all the stuff that comes with making a new civ. But… They made garbage.
Now, my perception might be a bit skewered, but from what I’ve seen the majority of people on social media agree with this DLC.
For example, the trailer on Youtube has purely positive comments and an insignificant amount of dislikes. And on Reddit, people are making up all sorts of dumb excuses to justify V&V. Sure, it’s Reddit, but still… It could potentially do well, sadly. And as you said, the investment was small, so even with a few sales it could be seen as a success.
Here’s hoping this DLC will flop, and FE will make something decent next time.
Maybe you should try downloading it anyways and see if it runs.
Btw, as of 12/mar/2024, you need to pay to get the US. So, basegame+US DLC. But you can buy both of those in a sale. Highly recommend it.
I also thought AoE3 was boring but it’s a really cool game.
probably worth mentioning that aoe3 has a free to play version. I don’t know for sure what’s contained in that, but I think it has a cycling pool of civs
Id rather they just go on break and enjoy themselves without trying to Nickel and dime us. Again 2 or 3 civs a year is shamefully slow! The original conqs gave 5 and is beloved in part for that reason
Why should I pretend to let this slide. This is “they didnt murder someone before so we should let it slide this time!” Energy
I’ve seen people say this quite frequently, but I’m not convinced it’s true. According to Steam achievements, the most frequently completed campaign (excluding William Wallace) is Joan of Arc – but only 6.2% of players have completed it. Most other non-expansion campaigns have about 5% completion rate.
Meanwhile, 40.5% of players have the achievement “eat [sic] 2 wild boars in Dark Age”, something you’d probably never do in a campaign scenario, which usually skip Dark Age completely. 22.7% have won a game with Chinese, a civ that is notoriously difficult to play as and has only one campaign scenario.
To me, this doesn’t seem consistent with most players being campaign only, or even most players playing the official campaigns at all.
yeah, i think what’s most common is games against AI
either by yourself or with friends. In that sense singleplayer games are the most common, but not campaigns
I think the devs said something like that when announcing the DLC. But yeah, I’m also skeptical towards the dev’s statements. I mean, I’m a campaign only player, but I really doubt I belong with the majority when clearly PvP gets more viewers on Youtube and Twitch.
Also, they said the latest DLC for AoE4 was the best selling expansion in the franchise ever, which is hard to take seriously when The Conquerors exists. And also, there supposedly were 50 million players across all Age games in all platforms in 2023. For comparison, the most played game ever is League of Legends and it had 150 million players in 2023. So, AoE has a third of that amount, which is still insane, but… Why does it feel like every DLC has a smaller and smaller budget? And why is it not a mainstream franchise? I smell bullshit, and with this crap DLC, I trust them even less…