That’s also a fair point. At this rate if they aren’t going to put out a full on expansion, I hope we start seeing more (and better value priced) gameplay packs, such that add new wonders, units, buildings, and even gameplay mechanics.
Then again, maybe a year (not quite) isn’t really long enough to give up hope yet?
Oh no, the latest patch changed end-of-turn handling! When there’s an auto-moving unit that requires additional input after you hit End Turn, you can now ONLY move that currently active unit and do NOTHING else, and then (when all such units have been activated) the turn ends automatically. Hate that, I hope they change it back. :(
On the upside, backstabbing attacks are way down, although still apparently random.
Dejin
5623
I loved the Civ3: Conquests scenarios developed by BreakAway games. They were very well done, and I appreciated the extra variety they provided. I played a bit with the Civ IV scenarios, but didn’t find them as compelling as the Conquests scenarios.
In general, I will admit that I am far more likely to play randomly generated Civ games though.
Dejin
5624
I don’t think it makes sense for them to release an expansion pack, unless the expansion basically consists of the DLC they’ve already released.
Think about what the key selling points of an expansion pack are. I’m guessing the new Civs and possibly the scenarios are at least as much of a selling point for many/most players as the new rules added. They’ve already released new Civs and scenarios as DLC, that makes the expansion just about new rules added.
I’d love to be wrong, but I think the DLC released probably kills the chances of an expansion. I am impressed though that they are continuing to support the game with new patches.
Blips
5625
Releasing expansions allows them to implement new gameplay features. It’s far more difficult to add game mechanics through DLC as the whole point of DLC is being able to pick and choose what you want.
So they release expansion 1, and then release new DLC with the requirement of having expansion 1 installed.
I’m guessing they’re working on an expansion.
I can see the releasing a few DLC for civilization, but the whole idea of releasing Wonders and scenario (who plays those is baffling) I think Civ V sales should be sufficient for an expansion and there are some obvious areas for expansion with Civ such as religion, and possibly an expanded trade system. Add this incorporate the DLC plus develop some breakthru in AI, and I’d happily pay $20.
I do. The ones for Civ5 are fairly interesting situations with (mostly) very different goals than the base game. Because they are more or less fixed situations, they feel more tuned than the playing a random Civ game. Ed Beach (who did the scenarios) is an award winning (board) wargame designer (Here I Stand, GCACW, etc.) and it shows on these scenarios. The other good thing about them is that they are shorter than playing out a whole game.
melak
5628
More horse armor for Civ V. I miss the old days of substantial expansions. You know, Civ IV.
I’d be almost certain that they are - probably something in the $25-$30 price point. While DLC is a nice cash cow, it doesn’t generate sales of the base game. Expansions can, and this enhances the value to Firaxis. I’d frankly be shocked if they weren’t working on an expansion of some variety.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up my experience with them. While I most often play a randomly generated game, the scenarios can be quite fun and the replay value is there at least for once through on each side that you have a vague interest in.
I really like the New World scenario. It’s definitely worth checking out if you have that DLC.
Warren
5631
I’ve played scenarios for the achievements. Silly I know.
Also, I turned into a filthy liar. Since I was going to buy the Koreans DLC, I splurged the extra and got the combo pack. So, it turns out that their plan to get the extra from me was successful… Oh my weak weak willpower.
You know how some people refer to lotteries as the “stupid tax”? I think I’m going to begin to refer to DLC as the “weak-willed tax”.
I did notice that they haven’t split out the Korean civ from the scenarios this time, unlike the previous civilization DLCs. Is this deliberate because the scenario packs weren’t selling as well as the civs on their own?
[Edit] Doh, as mentioned below, I’m an idiot. Carry on.
Maniac
5633
Civilizations and scenarios have always been packed together.
Ha, don’t know why I thought differently. I hunted down the DLC list on Steam and noticed that each of my DLC say “Civ and Scenario Pack.” Goes to show how much I paid attention to the scenarios. I must have been thinking of the map packs as being separate from the civ packs.
Man, my memory is shot these days.
I was thinking the same thing. I do not mind shelling out 30 bucks for a substantial expansion, but I do mind being “horse armored” for a slew of expansions that probably will never add up together for a said worthwhile expansion. The sum of the parts is lacking in my mind.
Maybe if they package up every DLC as one product I will bite, but until then I have plenty to do with Civ V.
I wish they would release cosmetic Horse Armors a la Relic (you know, if they must) and package the civs/wonders/gameplay stuff into a substantial expansion.
When you look at the content per dollar, DLC is fucking terrible compared to an expansion. Beyond the Sword added ten civilizations and that wasn’t even half of what it added to the game (espionage, corporations, new leaders, new units, scenarios, random events, new wonders).
If BtS came out as a trickle of DLC the total cost would have been something like $100 easily.
Of course, I’ll just wait for the inevitable Civ 5 Gold/GotY/Ultimate edition that comes with the whole package.
I too dislike the trickle of DLC and would rather get it all in one go. Expansion? DLC Bundle? Call it either
Pod
5638
As a teen I played a lot of Civ2 scenarios – mostly the ones that started you with tanks and things.
Alan_Au
5639
Hey now, Civ 3 (mostly the Conquests expansion) had awesome scenarios. Actually, they were the best thing about Civ 3.
/manifesto signed. I understand some of the market reasoning - “people say they want expansions but they don’t want to pay expansion prices, so this way we actually get money” - but I’m at the point where I really don’t buy much DLC out of irritation with the serving size and method. It isn’t like an angry boycott or anything, I’m just not happy with the model.
