I agree. And no game is perfect. Doesn´t mean Frontier shouldn´t focuis on polishing the game. And to be honest, I think they re-prioritize stuff. I believe even small thing can change PC for better. Rly, sometimes there are some things that can be just re-balanced and they make a huge difference. Sometimes I feel they try to make PC greater than it is. Trying to slap "huge" new features in the free updates in favour of smaller, but more important fixes. In the end, it ends up that even these great additions are not good enough. To be honest, I don´t believe I´m in minority if I say that Fireworks are superior in most ways in RCT3 and PC is lacking. It feels like it was quickly mocked-up by devs (I think it´s actually the case, one dev mentioned this was supposed to come in November update actually, but they pushed it for the previous update instead). I also think billboards are something we didn´t needed like right now and again, it´s another feature that could have been done better. And is also another source for problems with optimization and is taking even more resources.My point is, all this should wait, there is no need to rush out with these things. I would rather wait even one more year for fireworks, having them with proper sequencer. By that time, PC could have had fixed another, more important issues. Again, my opinion, but I doubt I´m the only one who think this way.
Why are people complaining about DLC
- Thread starter monsterparty
- Start date
Indeed - I've a feeling part of the early release of fireworks etc may have stemmed from people 'wanting it there and then' (which I know happens quite often in games). It also ends up being a bit of an issue on keeping people interested by way of new features which I know sometimes doesn't go to plan.
Shane
Shane
It is nonsense when the BASE GAME has not been SORTED OUT - if you want to mindlessly waste your money on DLC for unfinished product well that is your prerogative!
Maybe if the game 'simulation evolved' was maybe just called 'broad spectrum simulation' maybe just maybe we would not be having this conversation!!!
Other software companies are future proofing for DX12 in other words the framework is allowing for DX12 although it has not been fully implemented this way they are ready for when it does TRUELY kick in. It seems to me Frontier (unfortunately) cannot do this (too much work on the engine they are using) and therefore in the near future they will have to consider a sequel and learn from beta. It would not surprise that other software companies are designing with dx12 in mind so when it does kick in they will be ready to take the rollercoaster market to another playing dimension!!!
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
All these free updates and hype - they are fire fighting as they know the underlying base problems, in their eyes, are not a cash cow and in budget terms extra labour costs to resolve problems they should of sorted out before release!
Last edited:
Regarding DLC purchase where do you draw the line £50, £100, £200 and the base game is not sorted out. I would say the engine they are using has restrictions and/or it is (in their eyes) too labour intensive to fix these.
As the old saying goes 'fools step gladly, where angels fear to tread'
As the old saying goes 'fools step gladly, where angels fear to tread'
Why put a limit on where the max we would pay for DLC (combined)? If they keep putting out good DLCs that adds value for you, why limit it? If it is good, you will pay. If it is not what you won, you will pass. If that, over the life of the game, ends up being $500, is that bad? The other model would be what EA is doing with many of their games, releasing a new version every year. Let's assume the price is $60 for a new game on average. In just 3 years you have spent $180 and just gotten marginal changes from year to year (some cases).
When you mention EA I assume your talking about sports games? Theres a reason people are willing to rebuy sports games every year, and it has nothing to do with innovation. Sports games are driven more by the roster, where as with a game like RCT players want innovation. If frontier were to release a sequel to PC instead of an expansion, it would only hurt sales. Imagine if frontier announced a PC2 and it had an all new workshop, meaning we lose all the previous creations, people would be enraged.
If you are going to talk about price, lets compare the current DLCs to the expansion of RCT. I think most people would agree that RCT2 had weak expansions compared to the other games, and the RCT3 Soaked expansion was probably the most popular. Soaked was like an entire new game, sure it was full price but it doubled what RCT3 had to offer.
Now with the DLCs in PC, we have a combined price of $23 for the 4 DLCs, which is over half the price of the full game, and yet they add very little to the game. Personally, I think the spooky pack is decent, but the licensed DLCs are a rip off. Why would anybody buy a themed car pack with no animated characters, especially when those DLCs have hardly any blueprints for them because of how limited they are? I personally will not buy microDLCs like that, as much of a fan of this game as I am (been playing every theme park game since 1994) I will not support bad DLC, and I think a lot of other people would agree. Its not good for the community to release 100 micro DLCs, imagine how annoying that will get for new players who want to download from the workshop but keep getting "purchase required" popups.
Last edited:
Yes, agree with that. And will be only good if more people take this approach, because it is only way how to make basically any company try harder.
Well, sport games yes, but also games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, GTA, Unreal, Far Cry, Crysis etc. All may not be yearly cycles but get new iterations frequently enough (not all are from EA, just used them as an example).
Not sure how enrages people would be with losing their current work in a potential new version of Planet Coaster. A lot of assumptions in that statement. Maybe the existing blueprints would be importable to the new game? Maybe people doesn't really care as much about the old stuff If there is a significant difference (to the better) in how PC2 would handle building, no one would want to keep the "old" anyway (my opinion).
Price is only relevant to what you get today and if that is worth it to you. Not what that might have gotten you in the past. There are a lot of financial factors to why something will cost more today than it did 10-15 years ago. Inflation is one of them. Another one is that things takes longer to develop today than in the past for various reasons thus making the development cost for a game, DLC or expansion pack higher. Same reason a gallon of milk today is much more expensive than it was 15 years ago. We have better tools to "extract" milk but it is also a higher cost for those tools to purchase and maintain.
I have heard your (and others) argument for the licensed DLCs over and over and I get it. These DLCs could have been much better and bigger etc. We don't know why they weren't. If it was because Universal had contains or that Frontier did not have enough time before release or even didn't want to do more than they did, we don't know. At this point, it doesn't matter. Hopefully Frontier learned from it and will do it different with the next (?) licensed DLC, if any. It is just ending up in a lot of speculations at this point (including my own).
Regarding the licensed DLCs, it's one of those things where we don't know what the licensing terms contained and what they were allowed to create from it. The Spooky one was different as that from what I can see is content created purely by Frontier and not requiring a license from elsewhere.
Shane
I'm aware of the situation, but it doesnt change how I feel. Whether its frontiers fault, or universals fault, whoever decided the licensed kits should focus on themed cars is crazy. We should have had one DLC dedicated to basic non-themed car pieces, and another DLC for characters. Bo has said many times they have 3 separate contracts for the 3 movies (even though they are all universal zz), but there is no reason why the kits couldnt have had even one animatronic character of doc brown or the munsters
Last edited:
Indeed (and we probably won't know either on why there wern't any animatronic characters).
Shane
Shane
Does it matter what the reason was? I mean were basically being charged for advertising if you think about it... we had a BttF park before the licensed DLCs were released, so in my opinion the DLC is basically asking us to pay for stuff we already have, so I for one hope they keep licensed content out of this game, unless its animated characters
Maybe if they were to add an entertainer to each of the DLCs, maybe more people would buy them
Last edited:
Makes sense although part of it was probably to make it easier to do certain things from the movie concerned rather than having to place lots of other items together in order to get the same effect.
Shane
Shane
Isnt that what makes planet coaster unique? Isnt that why we have the art shapes? The licensed DLCs go against everything this game is intended for, it takes away creativity, and replaces it with advertisements, and that is clearly proven by the lack of blueprints available for them
Last edited:
True (I haven't personally made any use of the licensed items although I do have the respective DLCs, although I have got a few blueprints made using Spooky Pack items as these can really help in making haunted items).
Shane
Shane
So you agree the licensed DLCs were not that great? yet you probably have no problem giving frontier money for nothing in return, which is fine thats your choice, but it doesnt help the fact that this game deserves better than being littered with microtransaction DLCs based on advertising gimmicks. I'd be willing to bet the devs actually could have had the right to make animatronics of the licensed characters, but chose not to simply for time and the fact that static objects are much easier to create.
Also, lets not forget all the duplicate objects like how we were given green smoke/fire in the munsters DLC, and now in the spooky DLC we have that same effect but its recolorable... or how people have been asking for transparent windows, which coincidentally showed up in the DLCs even after the devs said windows are too demanding... kinda sad to see that happen
I also wonder how the community would have reacted if say, the spooky DLC was free but the fireworks were a paid add-on
Last edited:
I actually bought them to help support Frontier as well as being able to use items created using those DLCs (although I have seen some interesting creations using items from those licensed packs).
Shane
Shane
I don't think anyone really has argued that the licensed DLCs were the best thing since sliced bread. In fact, most people were a little disappointing about what they contained. The argument and discussion about those DLCs should be over. It is in the past. If Frontier has tread the feedback we won't see DLC like those going forward anymore. We didn't with the Spooky pack which was much bigger and better. End of story. IF they keep putting out similar DLCs like the licensed ones over and over, then you have an argument, but why not give them the benefit of the doubt? They have shown that they listen to the community (to a certain degree). As mentioned, the Spooky pack is one sign of that. People should look at the glass half full instead of half empty.
No matter what Frontier decides to release ad a free DLC vs. a paid you will have the same number of people (not necessarily the same people as tastes are different) complain about the way it was done. You can't make everyone happy.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Exactly why I bought them too. I didn't even know (still don't) what Munster is but it didn't matter. I saw it as an investment in Frontier that i may get something that I potentially could use somewhere.
or you could finish your drink and rinse out the glass
my point is that certain things are more useful than others. If I had a choice of what I wanted free, I would choose the spooky pack over the fireworks because I have never touched the fireworks (in PC or RCT3), and I think a lot of people would agree
Well, thats what I saw preordering was for. I did not pay for alpha I bought the standard thrillseeker edition and just played alpha at my friends house, but the point of preordering was to support frontier, same with all the VIP bonus items that were outrageously over priced. Most games I wait for them to be discounted before I purchase them
Last edited: