DLC, Depth, and Monetization

Hey devs, I’m hoping so badly that you’re able to convince your community to pay for expansions

I’m desperate for a game to be taken to great depths, with unseen (except maybe in Dwarf Fortress) complexity

The thing is, it seems players never want to pay for new mechanics. It seems that only storyline DLC is acceptable.

In my view, this is really holding games back.

I badly wish that people would pay to bring a game from 1.0 to 2.0 instead of paying for an 8 hour campaign or questline

Anyways, all this to say that this game has tons of charm, pleasing graphics and audio, acceptable and functional UI…

It actually has quite a bit of depth in the sense that there are quite a few systems. Traits, Skills, Craftables, Research, Combat, Farming.

But each system seems to be MVP as heck… I hope these systems will quadruple in size and then I hope to see Psychology, Animal Wildlife (with like 50-60 kinds of animals) with Animal Training and Farming, and Relationships

Obviously, I want a game with depth, but I’m willing to pay for it. I’d easily pay $20 for each of those systems and/or each expansion…

1 Like

Sadly, I think you may be disappointed. This is a great game, but I don’t think the devs have any plans to make this the most complex base builder ever made.

You raise some good points for discussion though. Paradox have just taken over Prison Architect, and will certainly use DLC to take the game from 1.0 to 2.0, and a lot of players are very upset at this idea. They actually believe that a company should further develop a game for free after they bought from another company!

I think Oachkatzlschwoaf are very far from think about DLC and 2.0 either way though :rofl:

3 Likes

It’s honestly ruining gaming imo. So many open world RPGs, for example, could be made much more deep, with much more variety. A dev can expand the world already created with new fauna, more diverse flora, better/more complex NPCs… But instead, we get a seperate island with an 8 hour story.

Paradox isn’t the best example, though, because they fail to expand their base games and the DLCs they release are pretty expensive for what you get. I’m thinking of the Snowfall DLC in cities skylines. They made it so you’re either playing a snow map, or you’re not. No seasons of any kind. They state the following on their forums:

The reasons why we will not implement a season cycle to Cities: Skylines are performance, memory and design.

The modders will probably find a way around this, which is cool, but won’t change the fact that such feature is not feasible for us to work on.

I mean, the snowfall DLC is $15, make it $20 and release something worthwhile, ffs

1 Like

You may have missed my point about Paradox though. I agree that their DLC model generally isnt great, and although i would love to play cities: skylines, the $100+ DLCs is a real turn off for me.

The point is though, they bought a finished game, and are now going to use paid DLC to improve the base game, which from what I’ve hear, each paid DLC is accompanied by at least 1 free update.

Right. Also, the point you were making about people bitching about paying for updates. It’s ridiculous lol

I am happy to hear they’re planning to expand the game though. It’s still exciting. We’ll see how it goes

2 Likes

Haha^^ As Xaviien pointed out, Founders’ Fortune is not going to be the most complex base builder ever. We are just 2 devs and need to focus on certain features. If we start to many things/ systems at the same time, we’d end up with a game that offers a lot but nothing at the same time. :wink:
DLCs are not planned at the moment. Free updates are as it is early access. That’s all I can say at this point :smiley:

3 Likes