Don't bring the content with DLC's

Assuming full theme with mascot, animatronics, signs, building pieces etc and 6 rides with say 5 custom scenario's for SP management of the game then I would say £15. It in itself would be pretty much an expansion pack then adding to the game in a significant way.

Anything less than that I could being called micro-transactions and not what people are after.

The other way is if they didn't add the scenarios but had say a sci-fi & western theme pack with everything else than probably a similar price.

I am assuming that scenario games will be significantly detailed, challenging and maybe even create a story arc to bring more the theme park worlds that we create.
 
This whole discussion is kind of pointless at the moment since no one here knows anything on what Frontier is planning for PC. It is all speculations.

Frontier is a large company (relatively speaking) that had a revenue of £22.7 million last year. I am sure they have at least a few financially capable people on their payroll that knows that they are doing. Surly at least one of them (most likely many) have done some risk/reward calculations and come up with what they think is the best approach to make money of Plant Coaster. Because in the end, that is all that it is about for a public company. To make money in order to please shareholders. Every public (and most private) company in the world have the same mindset. That doesn't mean they will ignore their customers. But keep in mind, the people hanging around on this forum is a very small subset of the customer base. Most people doesn't care about all the details we discuss passionately about here.

Calling is DLC, expansion packs or something else doesn't really matter. In the end you will have to pay for new content one way or another. No one will work for free and assuming Frontier will give us updates with new game play content (being new theme set, rides or something else) is just ridiculous. It is not a right that we all have to be able to afford this game or any of the expansions/DLCs. If you don't have the money then save up for it or, better, use the money toward something more important than a computer game. This is a luxury item, not a life necessity like food.

In the end there is only so much time for Frontier to do the development. At some point the game has to be released so that they can make back the investment Frontier did when they decided to make this game. Developing a game of this magnitude is not cheap by any means. Every item we all want will not be able to make it into the base game. It is just not realistic. But I think we all will be more than happy if Frontier sticks with the game after release and keep developing new rides, themes or game mechanics to further enhance an already good product. I also think that the majority of the people on these forums (and outside as well) will be happy to pay for that new content when times comes.
 
I'm willing to spend $10-15 for one theme pack that comes with two building styles(like pirates having stone walls and stucco walls), decent amount of scenery, a few rides and an entertainer.

I can easily see them going this route. A space theme pack, Atlantis, Winter Wonderland, Etc. for $10-$15 each.
 
What would you guys be willing to pay for a theme pack DLC? For example, the pirate theme with about a half a dozen new rides.

For one theme and half a dozen rides I would not pay more than £10. And that would only be if the rides were track rides if some sort that I really wanted. I don't think I would want it if it was only flat rides.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I would be willing to purchase full expansion packs, but not slim DLC's.

This is pretty much my stance on the matter too.

Like others have said I think it would be a mistake to do small scenery type DLCs as it would make sharing parks far more difficult and go against the community aspect (the "Planet" part) of this game.
 
I don't normally buy DLC, but the one exception is if it is a substantial upgrade rather than small extras.

In the case of Planet Coaster I wouldn't pay for DLC if it is just themes or new rides, I'd hope these are included in the main game, or perhaps even a few given free after release until we get custom scenery

Stuff I would pay for would be something big like a fairground expansion, waterparks (like the Soaked expansions), or perhaps something like an Blackpool Pleasure Beach/Alton Towers park that included lots of new rides/scenery as well as a recreation of the actual park.
 
My biggest concern on this topic is how DLC can harm User-Generated Content (UGC). Developers tend to get very defensive and block all UGC when they have DLC plans. They don't want you getting stuff for free that they could charge DLC prices for. I really don't like that competition because it limits a game's potential and public exposure.

None of us knows what Frontier has planned for Planet Coaster. Maybe they'll do water park and zoo expansion packs like what was done in RCT3 (I really want an entire expansion focused on only water parks). Maybe they'll do DLC rides, scenery, mascots, and other things. To my knowledge none of this has been clarified or even announced yet.

I hope that Frontier finds a way for their add-on game content to coexist with UGC. We don't have to compete with each other. Frontier and community can create content that complements each other. For example, Frontier can't create every single ride in existence, but users absolutely can fill in things they don't work on if allowed.
 
Last edited:
But with UGC, devs think they have to do less. Ugc is mostly bad in sense of performance. Ugc creators also don't have time or the tools for making normal and specular maps (mostly). The best quality is delivered by devs, and that's why we pay for the game.
 
But with UGC, devs think they have to do less. Ugc is mostly bad in sense of performance. Ugc creators also don't have time or the tools for making normal and specular maps (mostly). The best quality is delivered by devs, and that's why we pay for the game.

Exactly. I think adding UGC at this stage in a game is laziness. If it's added after release them fair enough but it should never be a replacement for the work of the developers.
 
I wouldn't mind something like what the Sims 4 is doing, having smaller cheap packs like game packs, and then the big expansion packs, like waterparks. Of course I don't want to have to pay individually for the entire game, and hope the base game includes a lot of content. But I definitely wouldn't mind paying for some nice packs to add real gameplay to the game.
 
But with UGC, devs think they have to do less. Ugc is mostly bad in sense of performance. Ugc creators also don't have time or the tools for making normal and specular maps (mostly). The best quality is delivered by devs, and that's why we pay for the game.
You just replied to someone who has Unreal Engine, Maya, LibGDX, and Blender experience. I can't say that all other content creators would create high-quality content, but I would.

This is beside the point I wanted to make though. The point was that those of us interested in UGC would like to see Frontier support it at least as well as RCT World or Cities Skylines does regardless of content monetization plans. UGC, DLC, and expansion packs can all coexist without stepping all over each other or competing.
 
You just replied to someone who has Unreal Engine, Maya, LibGDX, and Blender experience. I can't say that all other content creators would create high-quality content, but I would.

This is beside the point I wanted to make though. The point was that those of us interested in UGC would like to see Frontier support it at least as well as RCT World or Cities Skylines does regardless of content monetization plans. UGC, DLC, and expansion packs can all coexist without stepping all over each other or competing.

You're one of some people who have experience though!
 
Back
Top Bottom