Login

russian armor

CoH2 DLC Prices Revealed

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (5)down
25 Jun 2013, 01:45 AM
#61
avatar of crazyguy

Posts: 331

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2013, 20:27 PMamonsot
This abuse of capitalism is the reason why nazies, commies and buddhists wants to see the west burn.


25 Jun 2013, 01:55 AM
#62
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2013, 01:41 AMPepsi
Those price are decent in my opinion. It's less than the $6 LOL skins ok.

But being able to buy new OP doctrines is a meeeh.. But I don't care as the price suits me.

ANYWAY, here are my personal thoughts about friendly DLCs.
I would totally pay $25 for a pepsi skin, I would totally pay $25 for a SNF skin.
I started to make my own pepsi skin (some of you guys have seen my vcoh jeep) but the fact that my opponent can see the new skin during the game change it all.

Valve totally gets it. They run big tournaments and let people buy pendants to support their favorite team and stuff. Imagine an alternate reality where Relic added observer mode and supported SNF and people could buy Sepha colored tank skins...
25 Jun 2013, 03:05 AM
#63
avatar of CombatMuffin

Posts: 642

Imagine a world where Relic allows mapmakers to publish their work in the worksho or somethingp for moneyz.

Then run a contest every 6 months to see which maps made by the community are the best, and include them in the automatch rotation.

Sega Relic keeps a 30% comission of the maps, mapmaker takes the rest.

Hello money. Bye bye unbalanced DLCs.
25 Jun 2013, 03:07 AM
#64
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

Selling maps segments the community, because you can't play on a map unless you buy it. Selling commanders doesn't segment the community, because you can play against other players regardless of the DLC the two of you have bought.
25 Jun 2013, 03:20 AM
#65
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2

How about Relic having a automatch map contest and the winners get a considerable cash prize. Relic gets new content to add to their game, the mapmakers have incentive to put in hard work, but the developers don't need to pay them a full salary either. Everyone wins.
25 Jun 2013, 03:23 AM
#66
avatar of crazyguy

Posts: 331

How about Relic having a automatch map contest and the winners get a considerable cash prize. Relic gets new content to add to their game, the mapmakers have incentive to put in hard work, but the developers don't need to pay them a full salary either. Everyone wins.


While that is a good idea everyone would like to see, that does not have anything to do with the problem at hand. Which is to get relic money for continued development, while keeping things fair.
25 Jun 2013, 03:33 AM
#67
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2013, 03:07 AMInverse
Selling maps segments the community, because you can't play on a map unless you buy it. Selling commanders doesn't segment the community, because you can play against other players regardless of the DLC the two of you have bought.

They could do what Valve does: give the maps away for free but let players buy "stamps" to pay the mapmakers money.
25 Jun 2013, 05:19 AM
#68
avatar of Crells

Posts: 255

cosmetic items are the best DLC moneymakers. skins, diffrent units that do the same shizz. being able to personalise your army, example being able to attach a tag, "31st conscripts brigade" or whatever you want, being able to make yourself unquie appeals to almost everyone.-
25 Jun 2013, 05:31 AM
#69
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

Imperial Dane would go nuts over that shit. I bet he'd buy it all!
25 Jun 2013, 06:42 AM
#70
avatar of sir muffin

Posts: 531

Imperial Dane would go nuts over that shit. I bet he'd buy it all!


those moments in the propaganda cast where he just spaces out and looks at the tank models.

good times
raw
25 Jun 2013, 07:09 AM
#71
avatar of raw

Posts: 644

What I don't quite understand is that they had a much better microtransaction model in CoHO. The interface was better, the stuff that was being sold was better and the customisation was better. CoH2 is excessively lame in comparision, so it's no wonder that people complain.

The game was also rushed out the door, that much is obvious by now.
25 Jun 2013, 07:15 AM
#72
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

omg conscript support o_O
seems op, if this shows the balance of coh 2, then well done relic!
and the price aswell: 2.50€? i bought metro 2033 in a sale for this price, so fullpricegame costs as much as a commander? f*** me
25 Jun 2013, 07:40 AM
#73
avatar of CombatMuffin

Posts: 642

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2013, 03:07 AMInverse
Selling maps segments the community, because you can't play on a map unless you buy it. Selling commanders doesn't segment the community, because you can play against other players regardless of the DLC the two of you have bought.


Maps only segment the community if you include them in automatch. If you create coop maps, scenarios, etc, you can cash in on the true business demographic of CoH: Single Player and ComStomp. Its the whole idea behind Theatre of War.

25 Jun 2013, 09:16 AM
#74
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2013, 14:56 PMInverse
Conscript Support Tactics looks crazy broken lol:

INCENDIARY ARTILLERY BARRAGE
Areas of the map can be bombarded with incendiary rounds to burn infantry and deny access.
RAPID CONSCRIPTION
Any soldiers lost while Rapid Conscription is active are replaced by Conscript Infantry.
CONSCRIPT ASSAULT PACKAGE UPGRADE
Conscripts replace two of their rifles with PPSh-41 Submachine Guns for better short-range firepower.
CONSCRIPT REPAIR KIT
Demonstrating pure ingenuity, Conscripts can repair any damaged structure, vehicle, or bridge.
HIT THE DIRT!
Conscripts gain the "Hit the Dirt!" ability; when it is active, they seek ground for protection but will not move.

Also, you can buy almost all of the commanders in the CE in a bundle for $8.99.


It kinda looks crazy (esp the rapid conscription thing... why do we have AWM for infantry in this game I don't even...) but remember that conscripts are pretty poor for AT and unlike every other doctrine, you have no infantry based AT here - which is pretty severe on this doctrine (you can even kite with the scout car and that is viable here)

So anything armoured is the way to go here to counter this?
25 Jun 2013, 09:20 AM
#75
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

relax dudes and play tutorial, every doctrine has some OP stuff, in this conscript spam tactics, that commander has my face is OP only for early gaming, you won't see any bigger tanks, and as far as i know Rapid Conscript ability costs 200 MU?
25 Jun 2013, 09:23 AM
#76
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

yeah 200 mu, you need 6 deaths to give you one new conscript squad.
25 Jun 2013, 09:40 AM
#77
avatar of Grandmastersexy

Posts: 16

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2013, 19:50 PMswiffy
I don't simply play coh. It's not even enough to say I care about it. CoH is something I'm passionate about. In the intense matches, I will sweat to the best of my ability and when the game is over I will convince the nearest person that what I was doing was cool. Do you know how much I payed for vcoh? Maybe 30 dollars. I absolutely ripped off Relic. In the last couple years, I wasn't playing for myself. I was playing because it was all I could do to keep giving back to the game.

If I buy dlc, it will be because I owe it to the game.


+1+1+1
25 Jun 2013, 10:31 AM
#78
avatar of Rocchio 47

Posts: 1

i didn't get any conscripts support tactics but instead of him i got armored assault tactic with:

1 Radio intercept
4 Crew Repair
4 T35/85
5 IS-2
6 Sturmovik attack

Dunno why i didn't get the conscript one.
On steam i can buy the conscript commander and it says that i already have it....
25 Jun 2013, 10:56 AM
#79
avatar of LacunaIntroRiot

Posts: 51

I am not blaming relic or sega for this - we live in a capitalist society, they didn't invented it.

Nevertheless I am expressing my reluctance to support an ongoing development in the gaming industry that continuously offers less content for more money:

- day one content can be included in games in the first place; they are not part of "continuous development costs"
- systematized community support (f.e. steam workshop) allows for free maps, free models, free skins etc.; implementing this costs money (most of it is nonrecurring) but it also binds players to a brand
- dlc's that influence game mechanics pressure players to buy them; their development costs money but most of the said dlc's don't offer a great deal of content at the same time
- bonusses for those who buy a game that hasn't been fully developed yet; this forces developers to make the game appear super cool and to promise lots of things they might not be able to realize

Not to mention premium services (like in BF3), real money auction houses (like in D3), full priced single player games with like 5 hours playtime (wtf!, I don't give a sh*t about achievements, I'm not a monkey) or the release of ridiculously bugged games in general.

... let's say 1 million ppl buy a coh2 commander for only 1$: that is one million dollar for a set of abilities, of which maybe 4 are already implemented in the game. Does it really cost 500.000$ to implement a ability such as f.e. "Allied War Machine"? I don't think so.

Running servers, developing patches, administrating communities and new content do cost money - that doesn't necessarily mean I have to pay money for something, that isnt worth it.

I love playing games and I want to be able enjoy one of my most beloved leisure activities in the future, too.
25 Jun 2013, 13:18 PM
#80
avatar of krunsh

Posts: 6

I'm surprised by how conservative some people are around here. To me:
- There is nothing wrong with digital (Less plastic stuff to be thrown in the garbage in a few years, less money going to big distributors and more money directly to the devs.).
- Nothing wrong with pre-orders (Many of the people who complain about big publishers such as ''EA'' will also complain about pre-orders; which is contradicting considering how this is all about giving money to the devs for a product that you want even though it is not finished. Devs don't have much money of their own, it allows us the players to become the ''publisher'' and to have an influence on how they will be making the game.
- Nothing inherently wrong with the idea of DLCs (They are optional and they are a great way of keeping work on a game even though it has been released. No more waiting for a new expansion a year later or for a sequel, a game can now have a much longer life of its own with constant addition, and devs can make much more money out of it to afford to keep people working on it.

Only a few of these skins/commanders are interesting to me so I might end up dropping a few more dollars if I feel the game is good enough to deserve more money. And I hope they will release more skins that will fit what I want (I personally want some old and rusty urban looking soviet tanks!).

This does not seem to me like the definition of ''Pay to win'', if you could buy bulletins to boost your troops and such... Then it would be terrible, but if the commanders are balanced, then it is just paying for more options.

Those who do not like the idea of a DLC can obviously voice their opinion by not spending money on them :)
PAGES (5)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

989 users are online: 989 guests
1 post in the last 24h
11 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM