3 ms·
The alternative model is what franchises like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed do: spend $60 every year on a brand new game while the previous year's game is u
by baumandm 8y ago
The alternative model is what franchises like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed do: spend $60 every year on a brand new game while the previous year's game is unsupported. And $60 is without any of the extras...you can pay $80 for a deluxe edition, buy some lootboxes, etc.
Between the two, I actually prefer the continued development model. It also makes you feel like you can pick it up anytime and not be playing an obsolete game.
Paradox is another example of a company doing this well. A lot of people complain about the total cost of buying Crusader Kings II or EU4 with all DLC today (~$300), but these games have been in continuous development for half a decade or more. All that effort has to be paid for somehow.
- EpicEng 8y ago>The alternative model is what franchises like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed do Another alternative model is a monthly fee, like many MMO's use. Remember when bungie said they wanted to deliver a first person MMO experience with an ever expanding world? Most people didn't take that to mean paid DLC for every new raid and sequels which wipe your character's progress.
- notSupplied 8y agoI think most game companies are terrified of the monthly fee after the row of corpses of "WoW killers" that depended on a monthly subscription. Most believe that "WoW is the only thing in the world that can command a monthly fee and it'd be hubris to think your new game could do it."