Paid DLC in X4

[vkerinav]

]-... and important bug fixes.

Well, that's actually the domain of "patches", innit? Oh wait, I believe the new, 'politically correct' term is "updates"... :P

... and there I though I had a monopoly on questionable jokes...

[Axeface]

There will absolutely, without a doubt, be Paid DLC/Expansions (whatever you want to call them) for X4. It is just the way of the world now. There WILL be dlc. I would like to note however that Egosoft is not a company that makes 'Horse Armour'/SEGA like dlc's.

[assemblerbot]

I personally don't like paid DLC's in general. But for some games (like the X series) I wouldn't hesitate to buy even new skin for my ship.

I know you need money for the development, that's why I bought XR including DLC and actually never really played it.

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

If they just continued the XR way of DLCs, I'd be happy. HOL was great, TOL was great. Worth every penny, keep at it.

Also please no campaign/story DLCs. That's not what makes egosoft's games what they are, it's the sandbox.

[carran]

my $0.02 worth...

I bought X-BTF then every X release since. Like many others spent thousands of hours playing

I also bought XR and didn't get on with it at all but appreciate things have improved since then

Frankly I don't care whether the content is called DLC or patch or not, so long as it adds "something" of value, I'm all for it, and yes, I am happy to pay for such improvements

Where else can I get thousands of hours entertainment for such little financial outlay? And to echo OP comment, the support from Egosoft by far exceeds that from any other commercial organization - all from a small studio

[Skeeter]

If they just continued the XR way of DLCs, I'd be happy. HOL was great, TOL was great. Worth every penny, keep at it.

Also please no campaign/story DLCs. That's not what makes egosoft's games what they are, it's the sandbox.

I disagree, too much sandbox empty meaning of playing means story and scripted well made non generic missions are needed.

I personally am done with sandbox gameplay in x games but I'd like to flying a space game and progress through missions based in a x game. X games shouldn't be catered purely for sandbox gameplay. IMO.

[Graaf]

Hang on a second. Are you saying that X4 is going to be... <Cue iconic horror film music> DLC?

Well, technically almost everything is distributed via Steam/Origin/GOG, which makes it all DLC. Even physical boxes come with a redeem-code.

[RAVEN.myst]

If they just continued the XR way of DLCs, I'd be happy. HOL was great, TOL was great. Worth every penny, keep at it.

Also please no campaign/story DLCs. That's not what makes egosoft's games what they are, it's the sandbox.

I disagree, too much sandbox empty meaning of playing means story and scripted well made non generic missions are needed.

I personally am done with sandbox gameplay in x games but I'd like to flying a space game and progress through missions based in a x game. X games shouldn't be catered purely for sandbox gameplay. IMO.

I'm totally with Skeeter on this one - story content defines the game for me. "That's not what makes egosoft's games what they are, it's the sandbox" is not a truism, it's an OPINION, and can't be asserted as an absolute truth - mine, for instance, is the polar opposite. When I run out of campaigns to play, I tend to abandon the game and start a new one - this is why I can play TC or AP for so much longer than Rebirth - the latter's story is shorter and thus runs out sooner, AND this is compounded by the fact that only one of the starts actually offers the campaign (unlike the previous Xs), which means that those non-plot starts are effectively of no interest for me except in the very limited cases when I want to test a particular method or hypothesis. (To put it in personal perspective, I can generally stretch a plot game out to a maximum of 2 weeks, but I tire of any other start in a couple of days.)

People say that the sandbox offers opportunities for the player to create his/her own goals, but these are limited in some respects. Campaign games are able to offer both restrictions and objectives that a player cannot create for him/herself - think especially on some of the lengthier X3TC plots for examples of this, or special encounters such as the Xenon "graveyard" in an advanced X3AP game for another. More content such as this makes the game more interesting for me - unique challenges that can't be contrived by the player no matter how creative.

For a pure sandbox, I play something online (such as EVE), but even then that tends to pale after a while.

[Nanook]

...
I personally am done with sandbox gameplay in x games....

Sandbox play is the ONLY reason I play X games. Without the sandbox, X wouldn't even by on my playing radar. So you can take your fixed story games and "put them where the sun don't shine". IMO!

[ezra-r]

We all want sandbox here, that's clear. When some say they don't want pure sandbox, it means what we also don't want a brainded space game where you can go anywhere and do anything but there is little thing to do and the things that exist make little sense.

The universe must have wonders, things to do, hidden stuff, hidden quests, misterious crap, exploration, economy, etc.. so one does not get bored and lonely.. in the sandbox.

[Rei Ayanami]

Personally, i don't mind DLC.
As long as the game engine doesn't change in huge amounts, so a DLC/"Expansion pack" can be made to deliver new content, i dont see how buying a DLC is any different than buying a new X game without having to start all over again (X3:Reunion/X3:TC/X3:AP).

So in that regard (not having to start all over again) DLCs are actually better than releasing a completely new title, not to mention that it's also probably more easier for Egosoft, less product management stuff and they can adjust and produce DLCs depending on peoples feedback, rather than taking a risk and making a whole new game.

Heck, as long as the price is fair and it's enough content per DLC i wouldn't even mind DLCs for X4 on a regular basis until we have the entire old X-universe back. At least with Egosoft i can be assured that they give a damn about their game... at least in the long run (*hint hint, jab jab @ X:R release* j/k) and that it's a game in can enjoy for hundreds or thousands of hours.

[Rei Ayanami]

We all want sandbox here, that's clear. When some say they don't want pure sandbox, it means what we also don't want a brainded space game where you can go anywhere and do anything but there is little thing to do and the things that exist make little sense.

The universe must have wonders, things to do, hidden stuff, hidden quests, misterious crap, exploration, economy, etc.. so one does not get bored and lonely.. in the sandbox.

Yea, that's something i'm missing in the current unmodded X:R, everything feels a bit static... (enemy) ships are always spawning at the same locations reagardless whether it makes sense or not, indestructible stations, limited galaxy-wide Ai trading, limited station building locations.... the DLCs added some exploration aspects which i really appreciate (disco-meow mine, anyone?). hope X4 improves in all these points.

[Vector_Gorgoth]

Why not just return to the classic Expansion Pack model?....

Kindly explain the differences between an "expansion pack" and "paid DLC"? The only difference I see is that one comes in a box and the other gets downloaded from the internet.

That's actually a good question. Like the question of defining a "heap" there are some obvious corner cases, but, in general, the definitions are fairly simple.

To begin with, medium doesn't matter - whether an expansion or DLC is distributed physically or digitally is irrelevant.

"Expansion" generally refers to what I'd call a "soft sequel" which leverages the assets from the original game (and, optionally, other expansions) in addition to adding its own content. X3:AP is a good example; so is SC:BW. Both AP and BW are installed on top of the base games (TC and SC, respectively); both have their own plot and mission structure; both reuse assets from the base games, but also add new content and/or features in order to expand the game - hence the term "expansion". Either can be played as its own game, without ever needing to touch the base game directly.

"DLC" refers to additional content which is strictly a part of an existing game. For example, adding a new sector (or sectors), items, ships, equipment, etc. - or even new mission trees that fit into an existing game. DLC can range from frivolous (new skins) to substantial (an entire new mini-campaign); the "downloadable" part of "DLC" is incidental of the fact that nowadays it's a lot easier all around for players to download content than it is to deal with physical media and all the logistical nightmares that entails.

In blunt terms, X3:AP or even X3:TC were not worth the cost when they were released, but as they were expanded upon, and new content added, they grew to justify the original price tag - and since that content was free, in the form of patches (free DLC combined with bug fixes, in other words), it never felt like I (or anyone else) was being shortchanged by the rather woeful state of either game upon release. I've never regretted paying for X3:AP (or any prior X game, for that matter), despite the fact that it was just an expansion pack, because it was enough of a self contained game that paying for it seemed justified.

I don't mind paying for significant expansions to a game - if a game is worth $40, then adding the same amount of additional content is probably worth another $20 - not $40, because the original cost also included the price of developing the underlying engine, and that work does not need to be duplicated in order to add more missions, e.g. What I do mind is paying 25% of the base price of a game for, perhaps, 5-10% of that game's worth of additional content. That feels like a blatant rip-off.

td;dr: I don't want to have something that should have been included in the base game costing additional money. If I can't be absolutely assured that the content (eventually) available for X4 is about the same, for the price, as the X3 games, then it's not a risk I'm willing to take. If the amount of content (and, by extension, the number of hours I can waste playing the game) is equal to or greater than the current version of X3:TC, and Egosoft decides at that point to make a big addition and charge whatever that additional content is worth (accounting for the depreciation I mentioned above, unless they decide to make massive additions to the game engine), then I'd have to problem paying for that. Whether it's "DLC" or an "expansion" is less important than whether or not it feels like I'm being squeezed for cash.

[Assailer]

I don't mind DLC content as long as it's not a mandatory purchase to enjoy the base game. So far with X:RB this has been true, so i'm relaxed on this.

[Rei Ayanami]

td;dr: I don't want to have something that should have been included in the base game costing additional money.

The question is : What does "should have been included in the first game" really mean? That's a highly subjective topic.

Lets take X:R as an example : Should the Teladi expansion have been put as a free update to the base game, even though development for it started way, way after the base game was finished?

Some will say "new guns and sectors should always be free updates because these are things that should've been in the base game in the first place", others will say "every additional feature that has been developed after the release of the base game is ok as part of a DLC, because it cost additional development cost".

[RAVEN.myst]

We all want sandbox here, that's clear.

Ahem! Not clear at all - a couple of us have *clearly* indicated the contrary, thus "we all" clearly doesn't apply. That being said, I'm not against the sandbox itself, but I AM against it being ALL/ONLY (or even primarily) sandbox... (Oddly enough, I thoroughly enjoy throwing the stuff around and building castles out of it while pursuing plot goals - but once I run out of the latter, the sand on its own and for its own sake gets really really dry, tasteless, and boring.)

[Skeeter]

What raven said. Sandbox is ok sometimes but can't be the main game without a campaign or story based missions etc as a large focus. At least for me. If I wanted to build empires or what not I'd play a 4x game like gal civ 2, if u wanted fleets of ships then its homeworld. Or building stuff the sim city 4. But for x games I'd like a first person space ship game where I can do a lot of things but it has to be story driven so I actually care about something in the game in order to load up the game so I can progress the plot. I know some others do just want the sandbox but not everyone is purely playing for that. Most players probably don't even view this forum so hard to tell what the players are after except this very quiet forum that doesn't see a lot of traffic for a while now.

[Ezarkal]

As for me, I always saw the campaign as a prolonged tutorial through various game mechanics. While not exhaustive nor perfect as a tutorial, it still helps the player to familiarize with many of the most important features of the game, and provides a strong basis to learn the rest by yourself.

That is an essential part in bringing new players to the franchise. The absence of such in-game tutorial was probably the main reason why I never really jumped into X3. I had to find almost everything by reading about it somewhere, instead of being able to learn by playing.

And, as was being mentioned earlier, it's also fun to have the option of partially directed gameplay. So I think the campaign is important in many aspects. Whether it should be restrictive or not is another question. Restrictive being like XR, where some systems, equipment and quests are locked until you reach a certain point in the story, versus X3 where you could go everywhere, do what you want from the start and jump into the campaign only when you felt like it.

On that last point, I would actually like to see some late-game campaign arcs. Non-generic chained missions that you actually need a reasonable amount of resources to succeed. They could be totally unrelated to any main and/or tutorial campaign and allow for more advanced gameplay, open new story arcs, change portions of the universe, etc. (The jump drive and xenon invasion quests in XR are barely scratching the surface of what could be done, and in my opinion they fail to affect the game's universe. They are good entry point to the concept, but should be an inspiration for more complex stuff.)

[RAVEN.myst]

On that last point, I would actually like to see some late-game campaign arcs. Non-generic chained missions that you actually need a reasonable amount of resources to succeed. They could be totally unrelated to any main and/or tutorial campaign and allow for more advanced gameplay, open new story arcs, change portions of the universe, etc. (The jump drive and xenon invasion quests in XR are barely scratching the surface of what could be done, and in my opinion they fail to affect the game's universe. They are good entry point to the concept, but should be an inspiration for more complex stuff.)

+1
This is where X3TC got it half-right, and where X3AP fails somewhat - in the latter, it is quite easy to complete all the plots well before climbing high up the available tech and asset options. The same is even more true for Rebirth. It would be really nice to be able to embark upon a (perhaps elective) late-game plot that harnesses fleets and tactics to a greater degree and depth than do any of the ones to date have done. I agree that those jumpdrive and Xenon invasion plotlets, as an example, could be the prerequisites for 'unlocking' a late-game campaign.

[Ketraar]

AP being an expansion to TC its kinda assumed you have played TC and it would be rather painful for those that, while forced to start from scratch, want to get in to the "meat" of it quickly. Which is why when new players ask which one to choose as a fist game, I always say start with TC, even if just for the main plot and then switch to AP.

MFG

Ketraar