The Civilization V DLC speculation thread

[Krill]

And, not or, would be my expectation...

[wodan11]

I just stumbled upon this info. I think is very likely that the official Firaxis scenarios will be the DLC.

Or in the expansions.

[Sir Og]

Civ 5 will not include any scenarios out of the box, focusing on the core game

I just stumbled upon this info. I think is very likely that the official Firaxis scenarios will be the DLC.

[wodan11]

There is absolutely NO REASON of introducing free stuff through DLC and not through patch.

Those aren't the only two options.

You can turn on/off the mods.

What do you mean by that and how does it relate to this topic?

The ONLY reason for DLC is if they want us pay for extra content.

Well that's hardly true. Simply having a central portal is reason enough, even if everything there is free. (DLC doesn't have to have associated costs.)

And in this case they will be tempted to leave things out of the game that should be there in the first place, so that we buy that stuff.

So you're concerned that over time simple greed will inherently take over the system, even if the system is set up with good reasons and without abuse originally?

[MxM]

Depends on what format the "extra stuff" takes. If it's mods and such, new mapscripts, whatever, should be fine.

The main objection most people have with DLC seems to be with extra stuff to the *base game*, which is the same concern you're having. So if they stay away from that, DLC might not be that bad.

There is absolutely NO REASON of introducing free stuff through DLC and not through patch. You can turn on/off the mods. The ONLY reason for DLC is if they want us pay for extra content. And in this case they will be tempted to leave things out of the game that should be there in the first place, so that we buy that stuff.

[wodan11]

Depends on what format the "extra stuff" takes. If it's mods and such, new mapscripts, whatever, should be fine.

The main objection most people have with DLC seems to be with extra stuff to the *base game*, which is the same concern you're having. So if they stay away from that, DLC might not be that bad.

[Blaupanzer]

DLC would create a nightmare for multi-player, I would imagine. Just patches are a hassle, can't but think that "extra stuff" wouldn't shut the game right down.

[MxM]

I have to disagree. Free content that's only available with a legal version of the game that's accessed from an online server would reduce piracy as a full game couldn't be pirated anywhere near as easily.

That could be handled simply as a patch. There is no reason to have DLC for free content. I can not envision free content to be massive in terms of size for Civ V.

I dislike DLC with passion. I feel like companies are leaving things from the game on purpose to get it as DLC and to charge you twice. That simply spoils the game! Ugh!

[Krill]

It was said in the first week after the revelation that CiV was being made. Can't remember exactly where, and don't really care to look. I'll just stick with looking awesome when I get proved right.

The EULA was a guess, but I don't really see the point in it unless it is mandatory.

[Sir Og]

2K have said they are going to control the central hub that contains fan created DLC...

Probably means the EULA will make mods distributed outside this method "illegal", which would be interesting to watch.

Citation needed please.

It was in one of the interviews. This is the reason they are hiring the "Civilization Community Manager" IMO.

As far as paid DLC goes I am strictly against for reasons already explained by SpencerH.

[SpencerH]

All games are subject to piracy. The ease with which that occurs is not the issue. The issue surrounding "extra content" is that it implies one of two things, either the game requires the "extra content" to be finally complete or it is "overly complete" with the "extra content". In the first case, one initially pays for an incomplete game and is then blackmailed to buy the "extra content" in order to acquire what one hopes is a functioning version. In the second case, the "extra content" either adds nothing substantial to the gameplay (since the game is complete without it) or it unbalances the completed product while costing considerably more. IMO, both case one and case two lead to customer disatisfaction and the perception that the company is not "dealing fairly" with its customers. That perception, in turn, leads to piracy amongst even the most hardcore fanbase. Ask yourself how many players with legitimate games have "acquired" an "expansion" version either because they wanted to evaluate its value or because they felt it should have been included in the original.

[Brael]

DLC is a stupid idea that alienates the fanbase and leads to piracy. Personally, I dont believe Firaxis would be stupid enough to crawl into that slimey sewer.

I have to disagree. Free content that's only available with a legal version of the game that's accessed from an online server would reduce piracy as a full game couldn't be pirated anywhere near as easily.

[SpencerH]

DLC is a stupid idea that alienates the fanbase and leads to piracy. Personally, I dont believe Firaxis would be stupid enough to crawl into that slimey sewer.

[wodan11]

2K have said they are going to control the central hub that contains fan created DLC...

Citation needed please.

[Felch]

I doubt that Krill. It would be unenforceable and a PR nightmare.

It's much more likely that the central hub will just help modders get the word out about their projects, while giving players the assurance that the mods have been tested and are compatible. Stardock did something similar with GalCiv Metaverse. I'm personally excited about it.