The sad part is that the idea behind DLCs (to develop further content for a game already released, in exchange for additional money) is reasonable. Or it would be, if shitty developers didn’t abuse it to the point that it stopped being “downloadable content” to become “dumb and lazy cashgrab”.
I also think that CA isn’t just being benign with this statement, or his whole “let us not be arseholes” approach towards development. He’s being smart; player trust might be hard to measure but it has direct impact on word-of-mouth advertisement and piracy, so it’s basically the difference between “everybody knows it, plenty bought it” and “the few ones who know it pirated it”.
the idea behind DLCs
Back when they were called “Expansion Packs” and came on a disc for players who didn’t have a good internet connection. You can trace the death of the expac and the rise of MTX in the postlaunch monetization of Bethesda’s biggest games - Morrowind through Skyrim all have entire extra games that you can graft onto them for a premium price, but then during Skyrim’s release and re-release era they dip their toes into MTX via the Creation Club, to their total embrace of the concept in FO76.
But actually I think that blaming Bethesda is a bit of a red herring. The real dawn of DLC as we know it today wasn’t horse armor, it was Halo 2’s additional multiplayer maps. Microsoft went from releasing maps for free to charging for early access to maps that became free eventually to making everyone buy the maps. At around the same time they forced Valve to charge for Left for Dead 2 maps that were released for free on PC. MS really took point on conditioning gamers to lower their expectations for post launch content.
call of duty still charges money for dlc maps. nobody even plays them. and they still cost money
Agreed. If CA charged a few bucks for the 1.6 update, I’d have bought it without hesitation. Same with 1.5.
The best example right now is Factorio. There’s a new expansion coming out in October. It isn’t free, but it adds basically an entire new game on top of an already excellent and fully fleshed out game. I’m gonna buy it the day it goes on sale without question and without waiting for reviews.
Then there’s crap like Starfield where they added 1 mission for $7.
Slay the Spire is current $8.50. Starbound is $4.50 (both are on sale rn for future readers) if you’re looking for a space game.
I can’t actually recommend Starbound. It’s a game sure. And made by an indie team. But it’s past is stained. The game is also hollow and devoid of true substance and this is clear after less than 5 hours of gameplay.
FTL is a much better space themed indie masterpiece.
I also can’t recommend Starbound for much the same reasons despite loving it for a long time.
Thirding this!
1.5 update, with the entire island, I’d have bought in a heartbeat! It was insane seeing all the added stuff!
Yeah, agreed, a good DLC is awesome. The example that comes to mind for me is From Soft. Top notch content, delivered well after the release of top notch games, at a fair price, which expand on the level and boss design and improve it every time, while stepping up the difficulty for those who loved and fully completed the base content.
I wish every game I ever loved would get DLC like that.
I’ve purchased Stardew Valley on 3 different platforms. I’ve never done something stupid like that with any other game. And idc because it’s only like $15 and he seems like a good guy. You take care of us, we take care of you.
Yeah exactly. And it doesn’t hurt that it’s a game I generally just want to have available
Based.
Though I would 100% be fine with paying for Stardew DLC, the base game is worth so much more than its current price
I have bought it twice, possibly on sale both times but still. I’d never heard of it, and I’d never played any style of game like that, but Nintendo advertised it to me when it launched on the Switch and I eventually bought it. Later my family started taking the Switch more and I eventually bought it again in Steam. No regrets! Happy to support good games from small developers that don’t break the bank!
Oh shit, didn’t know it was on switch. Is there a digital only copy or do you need the game cart?
You can get it on the eShop. Stardew is on pretty much any device that can run it. With mod support, if at all possible.
It’s kinda wild to see how many big PC mods have an Android version these days.
deleted by creator
Bought on PC, Switch, Vita, phone… not even ashamed.
I sail the high seas from time to time, and I think I’ve bought Stardew 3 times now. It is an incredible game loop, and I will support the dev however I can.
Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with paid DLC that’s done because the dev loves the game and wants to make more of it.
I miss old school “Expansions” like brood war etc
I mean this is great, props… But didn’t he already make his nut with this game?? I mean I can play it on my fucking Tesla, I assume he got paid.
Yeah. He deserves his success, and I’m happy to hear he’s doing good things for his customers… But this kind of reads like a slight on all the developers who release DLC for profit. The vast majority of companies don’t succeed this well on any game.
So I’m glad he’s said this, but I also don’t think poorly of devs who release for-profit DLC, either.
The Ape family name is honorable
The Apes always pay their debts.
What about the Bored Ape?
Black sheep of the family
And Bathing Ape
A japanese fashion Brand? With bored ape on one end and concerned ape on the other, they seem to be center.
CA is too good for us.
Fucking legend
30 million copies sold. even if he only made a dollar into his pocket for each sale…hes doing alright.
But I have absolutely no problem with that whatsoever. Dude wrote a good, solid, complete game, sold it for a fair price, and made bank. That is the business model I want software to be sold under, and I’m thrilled to see it working for him.
Right, not only do I not have a problem with this - but it SHOULD be rewarded.
Personally I beat the v1.1 version of the game back in Oct 2016 - but I purchased the game a second time on android because a) i wanted to support a cross platform port and b) the guy really deserves it.
I like it when I have the option to support a developer more, but it isn’t expected or required.
Such an incredible game and a great humble developer. Honestly, there’s nothing I can think of to do to improve the game from a gameplay mechanics standpoint, but there are a few technical back-end things I do wish it had :
- Cross-platform compatible cloud-based save support. I want to be able to play in my same game save regardless of what system I play on. I don’t even mind paying for the game multiple times, but I want to have a singular Stardew account that I can sync somehow between PlayStation, Steam Deck, iOS, etc.
- Cross-platform multiplayer. If I want to play on my Steam Deck and hop into my spouse’s farm on the Switch or whatever… or have them be able to do so on mine.
- Mixing local and online co-op. If my kid wants to play with my spouse split-screen and I want to play on my desktop, again - would love to just be able to do so more seamlessly.
- Dedicated server support.
I know at this point doing those things would be very hard from a technical standpoint since they’d probably require a lot of deep work in a code base that was not built to do any multiplayer to begin with, but I still would love if they could somehow do so or fork the base game to allow it to be done by the community.
The cross-platform saves probably wouldn’t be that hard from a technical perspective. The game is written using MonoGame and likely doesn’t have that many changes to the core of the game for ports. From what I know about MonoGame (which is admittedly only a little, so I may be wrong!!) the engine abstracts pretty much everything.
I think the stumbling blocks are outside factors. Games often don’t update on different platforms at the very same time because console vendors take longer to vet updates. A game save from an updated PC version synced to a console version without the update could break it. Also setting up and maintaining the server infrastructure for syncing is its own can of worms. Certainly doable but it would pretty much require him to outsource that and he may simply not want that.
That’s fine for him, but let’s not take this as a guideline for the entire industry.
There are plenty of talented, creative, and committed developers who are trying to turn their dream game into their life’s work.
For most of them, the only way they can survive spending another 5 years working on the same title post-launch is by charging for the new stuff they make.
Yeah easy for him to say, he’s a one-man operation, so he gets ALL the profit to himself. Probably millions of dollars at this point… he’s set for life. He doesn’t really need DLC money. But other devs probably do.
Your point is basically the same but I believe he isn’t technically a one man dev anymore. For a while, he has worked in a small team, with a few games released/in EA on Steam having been created by former SV devs on the same engine with ConcernedApe’s permission.
I assume he also outsources the work of the console ports.
In any case, it doesn’t take away from the point, and you could probably still classify him as a solo developer for the purpose of talking about his upcoming Willy Wonka simulator. It’s much easier to pay 4-5 people from the proceeds of one of the best selling indie games of all time than it is to pay 40-50 people from the proceeds of a 10 year old game with free updates and expansions. No Man’s Sky, for example, must have some really consistent sales figures for them to continue to be making money.
If you violate the oath and make good paid DLC that’s worth the price, I won’t even be mad.
I agree. Good expansions are usually worth the money.
I love Ape, and think he’s one of the best devs out there.
I don’t mind paid DLC like Elden Ring or Factorio 2.0, when it’s basically a whole complete game on top of it. But anything micro transaction can go right to hell
Rimworld devs sweatin’ rn.
Why? Rimworld is a great game on its own. The DLC are basically large and detailed mods on their own. If you don’t want to pay for the DLC, don’t do so. Most of the mods don’t need the DLC.
Or just find a good sale on them when Steam does their thing 4-6 times a year.
Meh. They charge for DLC, the DLC is optional and adds a lot of depth to the game, it’s a small studio…
I’ll take it
My dude it’s a $125 indie game. Devs think they’re paradox or something.
No, it’s a $30 indie game.
Each expansion more or less adds extensions to the game the fundamentally expand on the mechanics and systems within the games. I’m okay paying for that, personally.
I appreciate it, and as a socialist I respect his attitude of “I’m rich off this so no need”, but also he’s done years of work to give us free stuff added to his game. If he had a paid expansion it wouldn’t be the worst thing.
What about an expansion. Could I pay you for that please?
