Don't bring the content with DLC's

[Curlyriff]

Curlyriff I think what rubbed a lot of people the wrong way was how the pay for play games used that same idea, eventhough they didn't call it DLC, to practically rob you blind with stuff that had no real value; or the DLC of items in regular games where they charged an outlandish price for one item. Now when anyone mentions DLC, it brings back a bad taste.

That doesn't mean that the expansion packs that people talk about wanting are not DLC and thus to suggest no content through DLC is incorrect. The difference really is perceived value. If Frontier decide actually "let's make a pack of say one theme that is not currently in game that we wouldn't have done because of cost of resources" and it goes for sale at £5 then I believe most would buy it assuming that it came with building assets and specific rides designed for that theme (and maybe even a few additional scenarios)

If however they said we have done this one ride and we want £2 for it then I could see there being issues.

Not having any DLC content for this game and style is not going to happen. It will be needed to keep the games longevity.

Edit: not sure why micro transactions are noted here in this thread really as they are something completely different and certainly don't work for this game model and am sure Frontier have no reason to suggest there will be micro transactions.

 

[Angelis1]

I can understand that some fans to be ready to accept DLC, by "fanboyism" I guess, because some people, when they like a product, are ready to stop using their brains and only works with compulsive emotional reactions but, this is something that can be easily explained, so ... okay for those who say "if they make DLC, I would buy". I think it's stupid on their part, and they are a big part of the cause of this cancer, but, psychologically speaking, it's ... understandable.

... what I really not able to understand is people ASKING or PRO DLC [bored]

I do not know if people are masochists, or if the world is rotten by the money system itself.
But the most frightening is knowing that it's either one, the other or both.

May god have mercy on us.

[...]

I haven't read all the way through this but assume we had another RCT3 Soaked and Wild expansion pack (which is a DLC) then you are saying that you wouldn't buy it?

You should, at least read this or start reading from beginning to understand the entire conversation, because it's about the philosophy and the legitimacy of this technique, and not the definition of the acronym. [yesnod]

 

[Curlyriff]

But the definition of the acronym is downloadable content be it paid for or free.

Expansion packs are downloadable content and people have lived with that for years. You yourself stated that an expansion pack once a year is fine if it is value for money so to suggest no DLC (including expansion packs) is rubbish.

Just because you are choosing when DLC is and is not applied does not make all DLC inherently bad. Just studios who use the model and take it for granted.

A theme done properly is a lot more work especially to integrate into the AI behavior they have discussed as they stated guests would like different themes and this would play a part so creating UGC for themes won't work apart from free play. For people who want more scenarios and for it to affect game play meaningfully then Frontier would have to produce the theme so if they set out saying "we can afford to do 6 themes with our budget and any others to enhance the game will need to be DLC" well that is fine by me as they will be truly added value that are optional.

There is a limited pot of money and there is more than just a skin to the theme specifically for PC from what the devs have stated.

I have read the post you linked and just do not agree with a lot of your statements in honesty. You are being very negative because of others that have nothing to do with Frontier or this game.

The Witcher 3 is a good example in that they wanted a large game but also had a time frame, so they sold the game with content they knew they wanted not ready but then release them as free DLC, just because you don't want to use the acronym doesn't mean it isn't incorrect to do so. Calling them a "free update" is the same in principle. You certainly seem hung up on those 3 letters being the issue not what is actually being discussed.

 

[Abletudu]

not sure why micro transactions are noted here in this thread really as they are something completely different

I mentioned it because in the strictest definition, microtransactions are DLC because they are Down Loadable Content, whether they were worth something or not.
In the terms that is used here though, I think the majority don't include Expansion Packs as they usually add quite a bit to the core game. Think of RCT3 and the two expansions, Soaked and Wild. Back then those expansion packs were not DLC, because at the time they were on actual phisical disks. Now with the modern technology, there is no real need for physical disks since virtually everything can be downloaded (but, I for one still like to have a physical hard copy).

What I believe is the main idea here is that DLC is the useless additions that do not really add any intrinsic value to the game that developers make just to get more money. If this is the main idea behind this thread, then I say we don't want it.

 

[Curlyriff]

I mentioned it because in the strictest definition, microtransactions are DLC because they are Down Loadable Content, whether they were worth something or not.
In the terms that is used here though, I think the majority don't include Expansion Packs as they usually add quite a bit to the core game. Think of RCT3 and the two expansions, Soaked and Wild. Back then those expansion packs were not DLC, because at the time they were on actual phisical disks. Now with the modern technology, there is no real need for physical disks since virtually everything can be downloaded (but, I for one still like to have a physical hard copy).

What I believe is the main idea here is that DLC is the useless additions that do not really add any intrinsic value to the game that developers make just to get more money. If this is the main idea behind this thread, then I say we don't want it.

That is fair enough. I believe actually we do want the same thing but I have just chosen to take DLC as anything that is after release and will be downloaded as that is how it works with the model that companies use. So if we ignore the naming of anything, none of us want a single item for sale at £2 but am happy with what would be known previously as an expansion pack back in the day regardless of what we call it now.

The only thing I really don't agree with and what Angelis has said is that themes should be UGC not something that we pay for. Frontier can only do so much but they want to make sure themes are a big part of how the game is played and how the guests react. Unless Frontier program the guests to understand the different theme then that won't work and as such UGC themes wouldn't.

My belief that we have say 6 or whatever themes upon release and more released later is something that would need to be done to make a true impact to the game as long as it includes both building pieces that are specific, rides that are specific and hopefully a few scenarios that make use of these directly with the goals you need to achieve. That cannot be done with UGC.

However UGC for more guest variations, trees, rocks, signs etc would be fine as I would expect that a guest sees all trees as the same object and they are truly different skins.

Rides can also be done and themed but then the guest would just see it as the generic ride rather than specific which is not the same thing. It will mean that the core themes Frontier will likely push and UGC would be much more specific one -off items that are not likely to be produced by Frontier.

 

[Angelis1]

But the definition of the acronym is downloadable content be it paid for or free.

Expansion packs are downloadable content and people have lived with that for years. You yourself stated that an expansion pack once a year is fine if it is value for money so to suggest no DLC (including expansion packs) is rubbish.

Just because you are choosing when DLC is and is not applied does not make all DLC inherently bad. Just studios who use the model and take it for granted.

A theme done properly is a lot more work especially to integrate into the AI behavior they have discussed as they stated guests would like different themes and this would play a part so creating UGC for themes won't work apart from free play. For people who want more scenarios and for it to affect game play meaningfully then Frontier would have to produce the theme so if they set out saying "we can afford to do 6 themes with our budget and any others to enhance the game will need to be DLC" well that is fine by me as they will be truly added value that are optional.

There is a limited pot of money and there is more than just a skin to the theme specifically for PC from what the devs have stated.

I have read the post you linked and just do not agree with a lot of your statements in honesty. You are being very negative because of others that have nothing to do with Frontier or this game.

The Witcher 3 is a good example in that they wanted a large game but also had a time frame, so they sold the game with content they knew they wanted not ready but then release them as free DLC, just because you don't want to use the acronym doesn't mean it isn't incorrect to do so. Calling them a "free update" is the same in principle. You certainly seem hung up on those 3 letters being the issue not what is actually being discussed.

Maybe it's a cultural difference, but here, in France, DLC ARE negative, it's not MY choice.
And also, "The Witcher 3 : Blood and Wine" and "The Witcher 3 : Heart of Stone", even if they are stored in the "DLC" category (because it's DownLoadable Content), they are still called "extensions du jeu" (game expansions)

But if you want to stay on the definition of the acronym, saying differently the same thing as me, fine !

I pass. [rolleyes]

 

[Curlyriff]

Maybe it's a cultural difference, but here, in France, DLC ARE negative, it's not MY choice.
And also, "The Witcher 3 : Blood and Wine" and "The Witcher 3 : Heart of Stone", even if they are stored in the "DLC" category (because it's DownLoadable Content), they are still called "extensions du jeu" (game expansions)

But if you want to stay on the definition of the acronym, saying differently the same thing as me, fine !

I pass. [rolleyes]

That is fair enough and I understand the premise just wanted to make sure people realise that saying no to DLC from the OP means nothing further after release which would be bad.

The theme part I don't think I could ever agree with mind. Not that UGC isn't good news, just that it has it's place and needs to be for the right thing and I don't feel that a full theme produced by anyone but Frontier is the right way to go as I explained in my later post.

I hope that makes sense. There is always going to be great things that UGC can bring though. Even just one of specialist decorations would be awesome and maybe we can add direct to a theme already in game bu making sure when it is created it is categorised as say Pirate or Fairy Tale and so the guests then respond in the same way but the initial category needs to be implemented by Frontier to make it truly work.

And with that UGC I assume we are always on about free play mode anyways because it would break scenarios because you could just set the price of rides and that to free and place them otherwise.

The themes I am talking about are much more to be integrated fully into the main campaign/scenario of SP.

 

[Paul_UK]

I may be alone here, but I'm happy to buy new content, either by small micro-transactions, DLC bundles, larger expansions or season passes.

If they put the time in to make new content that adds to the experience and the price is right, I don't care how it gets labelled

 

[Angelis1]

[...] I hope that makes sense. There is always going to be great things that UGC can bring though. Even just one of specialist decorations would be awesome and maybe we can add direct to a theme already in game bu making sure when it is created it is categorised as say Pirate or Fairy Tale and so the guests then respond in the same way but the initial category needs to be implemented by Frontier to make it truly work.

And with that UGC I assume we are always on about free play mode anyways because it would break scenarios because you could just set the price of rides and that to free and place them otherwise. [...]

Ahaha, here we are ! [big grin]

Sooooo ... Again, your fear would be resolved with the "content library" that I suggest since month now !!!
Which allows us to add complete themes (but not only "themes" btw), understood as a "new theme" by the AI because we could fill all the parameters of each object.
This library need to be integrated in the game (not just "connected with" like the Steam Workshop) and the content need to be moderated AND must work with the "online" features.

IF Frontier decides to sell themes (in the form of DLC for exemple) then ... their interests will be AGAINST the interests of content creators.
And if we are in conflict of interest with the developers of the game themselves, we have already lost, because they will work less on the "tool" allowing us to create and share quality content (in "blocking" or "limiting" certain aspects) and it is all players who will suffer the inconveniences caused by this conflict.
(An example of the consequence caused by this conflict of interest : If someone has the financial means to buy ONLY the game, there will be an imbalance between what he can build, and what another player can build if he bought one or many themes)

BUT

If, like I say, Frontier produces (and sells) new "gameplay mechanics", "features" and "tools" only, then, in this case there will be no conflict of interest with content creators, and we can have an unlimited number of object/themes/scenery/textures/music/sounds/etc... for free, AND Frontier still can sell things using the "Expansion Packs" strategy allowing us to have the things we are not able to make
(I mean, everything is possible, but modding is very very complicated and never well optimized), like, I don't know, a new "tool" for a "parade system" (just a random exemple) AND they also can give "official themes" and "new features" (like I said here) to "revive the hype, the sales, and do some advertising" with "free updates". (saying to the world : "Hey, look, the game is updated for free, buy it !!!")

This is the strategy that is most fair for both side !

In all cases, the issues of "UGC" and the "Economic strategy" are related !
And the choice of Frontier about these subjects is very important for the future of the game (more than some may think)
I guarantee !

 

[Curlyriff]

I am very sceptical that people will be able to create the theme that the AI understand because of the coding needed in honesty. Each element needs to have so many parameters to work efficiently and to be balanced that I do not believe this will happen.

If it could and Frontier monitored and approved the content then that would be very different, although it still wouldn't allow it to be used in campaign/scenario play that is SP.

Free play isn't an issue because then the economics in sandbox are not an issue.

There are two different elements to be discussed that need very different approaches and certainly one would not work properly for both Frontiers game vision or the customer. Some things you have stated in the above post haven't been discussed here fully and thus I believe you have a vision that maybe you haven't fully explained.

I really don't feel confident that the vision you have outlined on what people will produce in UGC will live up to the level and requirements that would be needed to seamlessly integrate into PC.

 

[danplayer01]

You see, i am a big fan of The Sims, where you have all kinds of DLC and expansion packs, we are actually begging for more. So as long as the base game has enough content on its own and continuous free updates like The Sims i and most people would be happy. I want those expansion packs and DLC to add something that wouldn't normally be included in the game. So I would love DLC packs for $10 that include maybe a new theme with scenery and a couple rides. Then for $20+ you could get an expansion pack that would include something like a waterpark of fireworks and events. But, as long as the base game is full on content everyone should be happy.

 

[Angelis1]

I am very sceptical that people will be able to create the theme that the AI understand because of the coding needed in honesty. Each element needs to have so many parameters to work efficiently and to be balanced that I do not believe this will happen.

We don't need to code, it's just checkboxes to click or not in the UGC tool.

Again : UGC =/= Modding

This is why we need a good UGC system, and not a simple "importer" like what the modding community made for RCT3. [yesnod]

If it could and Frontier monitored and approved the content then that would be very different, although it still wouldn't allow it to be used in campaign/scenario play that is SP.

No need to be moderated by Frontier, the community moderation can do the job perfectly.
We have already discussed this issue in this forum.

There are two different elements to be discussed that need very different approaches and certainly one would not work properly for both Frontiers game vision or the customer. Some things you have stated in the above post haven't been discussed here fully and thus I believe you have a vision that maybe you haven't fully explained.

It's not true.

I explained almost everything regarding my vision of UGC since 2015.
To be honest, I have explained so many things that I began to bore people with the UGC issue. [haha]

But I can repeat or clarify if you want.
Just ask, I will be happy to explain if you have specific questions. [up]

I really don't feel confident that the vision you have outlined on what people will produce in UGC will live up to the level and requirements that would be needed to seamlessly integrate into PC.

Well, the level of what people will produce is defined by :

- The "rules defined" and the "constraints fixed" by Frontier (How many polygons/triangles for a model type like X or Y ? Is that each model must contain several levels of low-poly ? If yes how much ? What is the size of a texture for this or that ? What compression/formats/parameters for custom music and sounds ? etc ... )
- The quality of the UGC system itself (Is the tool user-friendly enough ? Are the creations are adequately highlighted in the content library, and the game itself, to motivate creators or "group of creators" to post content ? How the voting system reward the creators of quality content ? What are the tools available for moderation team ? etc ...)

But, you need to understand a fact : The skill level of the community members together is always higher than the skill level of the development team.
The only difference is that it's a structured group around a common project, while we are individuals and isolated.
But the fact remains true (the joys of our time), and this is why a tool, produced by them, is helpful to structure this huge mass of free skills.

That said, I understand that you don't feel confident. It is a level of transparency, and working in collaboration with its community that has never been reached. This would be a first !
Even Steam Workshop is less interesting than this operating mode.
So it's normal to be afraid of what we do not know I guess. [rolleyes]

 

[Curlyriff]

Angelis,

Honestly what you are stating with UGC would be awesome, I just don't believe we are ready for that level of UGC ability/communication from the community at this time in honesty.

Afraid is a bit of a strong word but yes I am worried that this is more ambitious and that it would fail to achieve what we would all want from the system. The premise of what you have stated as I mentioned is not far of what I would want but the tools needed and the level of governing I just see being the stumbling point to this.

What you are after would mean that this game would almost be open source in the freedoms that we would need. Tick boxes are not always the solution to what is needed and I do believe for true integration of what you have stated some coding would need to be applicable or we would have the worlds most complex game tool to produce what we desire to the point that the Cobra engine is almost part of the game. I do believe that you are slightly underestimating what is needed (just a personal opinion) and although members of the community I am sure could do this as whole the number is not that great and so for Frontier to spend time producing this amazing tool they need to make sure the return from the community is there.

Thank you though for taking you time talk about this. It is always good to chat proactively regardless on view points.

 

[WingardiumLevicoaster]

Angelis,

Honestly what you are stating with UGC would be awesome, I just don't believe we are ready for that level of UGC ability/communication from the community at this time in honesty.

Afraid is a bit of a strong word but yes I am worried that this is more ambitious and that it would fail to achieve what we would all want from the system. The premise of what you have stated as I mentioned is not far of what I would want but the tools needed and the level of governing I just see being the stumbling point to this.

What you are after would mean that this game would almost be open source in the freedoms that we would need. Tick boxes are not always the solution to what is needed and I do believe for true integration of what you have stated some coding would need to be applicable or we would have the worlds most complex game tool to produce what we desire to the point that the Cobra engine is almost part of the game. I do believe that you are slightly underestimating what is needed (just a personal opinion) and although members of the community I am sure could do this as whole the number is not that great and so for Frontier to spend time producing this amazing tool they need to make sure the return from the community is there.

Thank you though for taking you time talk about this. It is always good to chat proactively regardless on view points.

I would agree here that tick boxes may not be enough.. Without knowing how complex the scenery system is and how it relates to the AI, we can't determine whether just boolean tick boxes would be enough..

 

[breezerHOG1]

funny how much time you guys spend discussing things you have little to no control over. I almost guarantee that whatever add-ons, expansions, OR dlc is in the works? The devs are already planning and working on it.

 

[Angelis1]

I would agree here that tick boxes may not be enough.. Without knowing how complex the scenery system is and how it relates to the AI, we can't determine whether just boolean tick boxes would be enough..

Indeed. We don't know how the guests react to scenery now.

But why do you think making an uploading interface with sliders, check boxes, radio buttons and dropdown lists, to determine the parameters of the object (like the price, what theme, what category it belongs, etc...) would be not enough ?

 

[WingardiumLevicoaster]

Indeed. We don't know how the guests react to scenery now.

But why do you think making an uploading interface with sliders, check boxes, radio buttons and dropdown lists, to determine the parameters of the object (like the price, what theme, what category it belongs, etc...) would be not enough ?

It depends how it's currently coded I guess to whether that would be that easy. Though obviously they will have a number of configurable parameters, it may be more complex than that. Just thinking with my software dev brain! often I can be asked to do things that seem easy, but would require a lot of work in reality. [happy]

 

[Angelis1]

It depends how it's currently coded I guess to whether that would be that easy. Though obviously they will have a number of configurable parameters, it may be more complex than that. Just thinking with my software dev brain! often I can be asked to do things that seem easy, but would require a lot of work in reality. [happy]

Not easy or long to code is not my question.
I mean, it's a full UGC system, so of course it take time, and of course it's not "easy". (And this is why they announced the UGC content hosting for AFTER the release, like what Jonny Watts said)

But why it would be "not enough" to have a system using check boxes ?
I don't get it. it sounds perfect to me.

 

[Kombiice]

UGC isn neither a solution. Many people don't care about #optimization !

It's not the Community's job to get us content.

 

[jazarahg]

I agree and disagree here...

I agree with the fact that the game should deliver a complete game, but what makes you doubt this won't be the case?
The game is still in Alpha and im pretty sure they have quite some finished content (near) ready that they haven't released yet, most probably because they want feedback on the larger features like path making, terrain tool, coaster editor, etc etc.

I think we get a lot more content during the final stages of the game or upon release. Which will make this game a complete game. (Yes, in Frontier i trust )

I disagree however on DLC, im all up dor DLC wheather in add-on versions or small DLC packages. I cant get enough content for a good game. Ofcourse the word "good" is the keyword here. If the final game is a dissapointment in won't buy DLC, but up untill now the game seems to be awesome. And if the final game will be of the same quality i won't mind spending more money on DLC.

agreed