New DLC Available

[Adagio]

There is new Civ 5 DLC available. But it is Maps

Sounds very boring. Even if they were free I wouldn't download it... Random maps are much better
The only non-random map I like is real earth with CORRECT starting positions. Why hasn't Firaxis included this for the past many Civ games?

[mkorin]

Speaking of random maps, does random map size work for anyone. My random mapsize is always the mapsize that is in my ini as the last map size, and it never changes.

[astrologix]

I'm not going to buy any of these maps nor other DLC content

I've put Civ V aside

[ColdPhoenix]

The only non-random map I like is real earth with CORRECT starting positions. Why hasn't Firaxis included this for the past many Civ games?

See post 8. You can get that for free via mods.

It's not created by Firaxis though (might have been Dale who made it).

[Adagio]

See post 8. You can get that for free via mods.

Thanks, I've seen it

Though I have tried playing with two mods (one that adds a clock to the game and one that adds more random map-types... so no mods that changes the gameplay at all), and when I finished that game I didn't get any achievements at all. I'm trying to get all of them (of course... fun has the highest priority), so playing with mods isn't an option for now

It's just weird that Firaxis hasn't done this themself. They did it in the first two Civ games, but since then they haven't

[Nikolai]

See post 8. You can get that for free via mods.

It's not created by Firaxis though (might have been Dale who made it).

Yep, Dale da Man made them right before launch. So they've been there from the beginning.

[wodan11]

we?

Yeah, we. For any purchase, you have to pay that stuff. Not talking about just DLC.

wodan11, the profit they generate per DLC is huge.

1) it's a digital download; no physical distribution involved. instead Steam gets % piece of the pie.
2) g&a&processing = part of the Steam deal. Steam takes care of that, and arranges the creditcard fee (3% per sale by Visa/Mastercard... why did you think you can get a 3% discount if you pay cash? )

word on the street is that big publishers pay 40%. no data to back it up though.

that would leave 1.80 for Firaxis.

from that point it depends on how Firaxis books its costs. i think we can safely assume that the costs of these maps have been included in the initial development cost, and booked towards the main project. as such my assumption is that Firaxis makes the full $1.80 per sale, at least superficially.

So we somehow have a conclusion stated as fact (that the profit is "huge"), then go on to explain all the supposition and gut feelings used to draw the conclusion.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

yes! it's called qualitative research. the kind of stuff that wins nobel prizes through philosophical advance. numbers, 'facts', and 'statistics' are for second rank losers who couldn't distinguish cogent argument from the hair of the dog that bit them (that would be subjective, after all...).

[wodan11]

Ok smart guy. This is not "qualitative research" by any stretch of the imagination. It's a collection of rumor, anecdote, and supposition. Let's look at it in detail.

"No physical distribution" means more profit. How so? Do we have any idea how much the marketing, overhead, and online distribution costs? Do we think they could package and sell a physical box in the store for $2.99? If so, then how much, and what's the bearing on online? If not, then the conclusion doesn't follow at all. On what basis do we make the leap from "no physical distribution" to "profit"? (Other than "steal underwear".)

"G&A and processing = part of Steam". You have no idea what G&A is, if you say that. In fact, everybody involved has G&A, and all those G&A will add up and increase the gross costs.

"Processing" Mostly handled by Steam, but not entirely. Even so, it adds to the retail cost.

"big publishers pay 40%, no data to back it up though". Even if true, how does this lead to a conclusion of "profit"? You say "$1.80 for Firaxis". Is that a lot of money? How many maps did they sell? And what about 2K's portion?

"safely assume [no development cost]". Ok, probably true. So? If they had development costs, could be the maps will cost $3.49 each. So what?

Here are some more:
-- how much does online distribution through Steam cost? If Firaxis did a free product (with 0% margin), what would the retail be?
-- how much is the licensing overhead, per product, and for the overall program?
-- what other costs are there for online distribution that don't exist for physical distribution?

[MxM]

Ok smart guy. This is not "qualitative research" by any stretch of the imagination. It's a collection of rumor, anecdote, and supposition. Let's look at it in detail.

"No physical distribution" means more profit. How so? Do we have any idea how much the marketing, overhead, and online distribution costs? Do we think they could package and sell a physical box in the store for $2.99? If so, then how much, and what's the bearing on online? If not, then the conclusion doesn't follow at all. On what basis do we make the leap from "no physical distribution" to "profit"? (Other than "steal underwear".)

"G&A and processing = part of Steam". You have no idea what G&A is, if you say that. In fact, everybody involved has G&A, and all those G&A will add up and increase the gross costs.

"Processing" Mostly handled by Steam, but not entirely. Even so, it adds to the retail cost.

"big publishers pay 40%, no data to back it up though". Even if true, how does this lead to a conclusion of "profit"? You say "$1.80 for Firaxis". Is that a lot of money? How many maps did they sell? And what about 2K's portion?

"safely assume [no development cost]". Ok, probably true. So? If they had development costs, could be the maps will cost $3.49 each. So what?

Here are some more:
-- how much does online distribution through Steam cost? If Firaxis did a free product (with 0% margin), what would the retail be?
-- how much is the licensing overhead, per product, and for the overall program?
-- what other costs are there for online distribution that don't exist for physical distribution?

Since this is the lamest DLC in TBS history for PC, the map pack will be bought by extremely limited amount of people. So the total revenue will be small, I do not know if they even make money out of this. There is optimal price for such things, so that people would buy it, and something tells me that it is $1, not $10. Corporate greed is ridicules, and at the end kills itself...

[wodan11]

Again an assumption that some grand profit is being made, and greed is to blame.

Could it be that they simply want to shut up whiners complaining about exclusivity of the pre-release promotions? Maybe they don't expect many people to buy them at all, they just want to give an outlet to the "must have everything" people in the customer base.

You have to admit we haven't heard much from those people lately.

[LDiCesare]

3 dollars (or euros, because of course it doesn't matter tha 1 euro > 1$) for maps is almost insulting. You can't even preview them of course, and it's not like it's hard to make a map. There are many out there already... Pitiful.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

This is not "qualitative research" by any stretch of the imagination. It's a collection of rumor, anecdote, and supposition.

Thank you for your kind words. But it is indeed qualitative. The problem is not only that the numbers are not available (Steam, 2Kgames, nor Firaxis distribute their agreements), it's also that we are unsure what to ask exactly. The parameters are shifting, ambiguous, dynamic, and etheric.

Ergo, philosophical deliberations come into play. What seems likely? What seem unlikely? What is this phenomenon? How do you measure it, if at all?

Applied to the case of this DLC: we don't know how much time and money was invested in these maps, we don't know the deals at stake, we don't know how systems of distribution compare, we don't know and why they interrelate and overlap, and we don't know how Firaxis accounts for its income and expenditure. In fact, we don't know much at all.

Your solution is to measure defined parameters along some static measurement stick. You're not going to get your data, so you're not going to get anywhere. As such, I'll take my educated guess any time above your rigorous-eloquent armchair-absence-of-knowledge-construction.

[Provost Harrison]

No thanks...if you know where everything and everyone is...there's no point in really exploring now, is there? Random maps are best in my opinion.

[Jaybe]

No thanks...if you know where everything and everyone is...there's no point in really exploring now, is there? Random maps are best in my opinion.

I agree, sire!
Non-random maps are okay for a game or two, but I don't even try them anymore. Random maps are the way to go.