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".
Another excellent example of this working is Factorio.
The original game doesn't cost a fortune, it's made by a small extremely dedicated team. They polished it so hard the shine made everything else look like vanta black. Playing Factorio ruins other games because the depth and quality of everything else is so poor in comparison.
The game came out in like 2013 early access. Full release completed in 2020. A decade after initial launch, they are going to offer a DLC, that will cost money.
Absolutely happy to pay for a DLC for that perfection.
I'm not happy to pay money for that DLC.
Are you kidding me? Already have 1400 hours in the game. And if this DLC is gonna double the base game, I'm screwed.
Yeah factorio doesn't cost money, it costs you years of your life
I already spend so much time on Rimworld and Stellaris, if I get Factorio I’m sure my gf will leave me and I’ll be found fossilized in front of a monitor
Yup that's a good trinity, those wow and Minecraft are what I spent the most time doing in my life lmao
I'm at 5500 hours and haven't played since Jan 2023...
I'm so fucked
Drugs might be the better option at this point.
Soon...
IMO Wube (Factorio's devs) is a lot like ConcernedApe, when it comes to not violate the players' trust. That's why for example Factorio never goes on sales - because the people there believe that it would be disrespectful to charge a larger price to some than others, simply because the others delayed buying it. (Cough Paradox Interactive aka Hipsters' EA cough cough)
They also have the decency to offer you a demo so you can make an informed decision before buying it, in a clear contrast with certain companies that expect you to buy it blind.
About the DLC: I'm one who typically pirates games, mind you, but I'm probably buying it, just like I did mit the base game. The base game isn't incomplete or anything like that; fuck, people compare it with crack for a reason - it's functional, polished, and fun to the point of addictiveness. And the FFF (devlogs) clearly show enough content to be worth it.
Yep.
I pirated Factorio way back when it first came out (0.72?) and I actually didn't like it. It was... Bad.
A few months later someone suggested I give it another go, so I pirated it again. It was a lot better. Like way better. I did a couple of months and was like .. this is soooo good I'm buying it.
I will pre buy the dlc the moment it's available.
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.
Factorio DLC is going to break global productivity for a month when it's released in October.
Every single engineer and factorio fan I know have taken that day off. Nothing is getting engineered for like 4 days minimum
I've booked 3 days haha.
I've not touched factorio since Jan 2023. 5500 hours till then.
You would think that the kind of person who loves Factorio knows the rule: never book launch day off.
1.5 update, with the entire island, I'd have bought in a heartbeat! It was insane seeing all the added stuff!
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!
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
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
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.
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.
I would rather buy it again or have the update/dlc released after some sort of community milestone in buying and giving away copies.
I really like the fact that its all one complete game and also every gaming person should have a copy, regardless if they can personally afford it.
Anything that is worked on for that long is fair game for versioning. It used to be that you bought a version of a software and it was yours for life, but if you wanted the new fancy stuff, you had to buy the new version.
Now it's either a subscription or an "app" model, how long can a developer continue to support a 3€ one-time-buy app with new features? Buyers run out sooner or later.
how long can a developer continue to support a 3€ one-time-buy app with new features? Buyers run out sooner or later.
Go the Terraria route and sell merchandise!
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 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.
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.
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 did the same. This game hits almost all the buttons for me.
Being an absolute Factorio addict, the only thing I miss is proper automation.
I mean, we could argue on whether his work is worth tens of times that of an average person, but I mean, there's people who make more and whose work is actually detrimental to society, so he's all right by me.
Actually, I want to go even further and say that I think his work actually is worth quite a bit. Not that he is worth that much, or others aren't (again, I don't know him), but he has given millions of people hours upon hours of enjoyment, and that's nothing to shake a stick at.
Yeah well that's the effect of the modern world, where works can be replicated effortlessly. Sucks if your work is producing physical goods that can't be copy/pasted.
You're not wrong. But "joy" isn't exactly fungible, so it's not really an apples-to-oranges comparison.
And what he's doing with it is also important. I haven't heard of him dumping millions into Trump's campaign or the Proud Boys or whatever.
And honestly, even if he did, my real respect is for the work that he did and the business model he used, not for him as a person. I don't know him at all. I don't even know his real name. I just meant that this way of doing software professionally should be more common.
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.
There is a difference between the DLC that is one and whatever the hell nowadays is practice. When its something like the eldenring DLC a dlc is absolutely fine.
Yeah but concerned ape added about half a game's content with that new island. Nobody would've blinked if they charged for it.
Absolutely.
This. It all boils down to value for money. 5 dollars for a skin cosmetic is bullshit. 5 dollars or more for DLC with meaningful content is okay.
If you're going to sell a DLC that is only a skin and people buy it, I don't have an issue. A skin adds nothing outside of "looks" and it's purely optional. If you the player want to pay for it, be my guest.
It's when games release a game that is unfinished, has bugs, and what should be a patch is sold as a DLC, I have problems with that.
Or when DLC adds a competitive advantage, that is just wrong. Like for $5 a month, you get extra "stability" in your scope, or the whole "pride and accomplishment" crates.
Those DLCs can go fuck themselves.
My issue with skins is that it is completely immersion breaking. You have Homelander and Gaia running around Call of Duty now. It's comical and just destroys my enjoyment of the game.
The skins get worse and worse because to continue the money machine they have to make more and more unique skins that just destroy the cohesion of the world they've built.
This is all there is to be said on the matter
Even if its 5(money) for a supporter item or skin it would be fine. Its different depending on the studio size.
Studio size has nothing to do with it, the only important matter here is whether the DLC is "required" or not. I'm fine with BS cosmetic DLC, that really doesn't matter, but when you promise features X, Y, and Z, and deliver X and Y but gate Z behind a DLC, that's unacceptable. I don't care if you're have 1000 employees or 1, that's wrong.
DLC should be for:
optional items, like skins, soundtracks, etc
additional story content not promised in the original release
Oh it does, if a small Studio releases a DLC wich just does a little (still in the lines you gave 100% agree on that) more story or adds a minigame or a new game mode or maybe even new game+ its ok (for a non outrageous price) if a big studio makes a dlc, my expectations are also higher.
Elden Ring's DLC is pretty atypical though, even as far as DLCs are concerned. Comparing it to past FromSoftware DLCs for Dark Souls, Shadow of the Erd Tree is like the size of all of the Dark Souls DLCs combined.
Expecting every DLC to match Shadow of the Erd Tree is setting yourself up for disappointment. Would it be nice? Of course, but it would be unrealistic to expect every DLC to match it.
Absolutely but its the standard studios should be aiming for or at least in this direction and not whatsoever EA and Paradox are doing.
While I agree EA and Paradox are lazy in making DLC, studios should absolutely not be aiming to make every DLC like Shadow of the Erd Tree. That would only lead to studio closures and developer disappointment when they ultimately fail to meet that very high standard.
I would rather developers stick to making something that they realistically can, that way they can finish it and get the satisfaction of completing a DLC they wanted to make than get burned out making something with too big of a scope for their team.
I think i worded it wrong, aiming to be was meant as in taking notes on what it did right and doing something similarly right With their product. It wasn't meant to mean that they all need to put another game into it or aim for impossible things.
Ah, I see. Then in that case, sure. As long as developers take the note that they should make the best product that they possibly can, then I agree.
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.
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.
I don’t think charging for content is the problem, it’s just the way some companies do it.
Exactly. A good content DLC should be similar to buying a new game, but cheaper for both the devs and players.
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.
Sure. He made many millions of dollars within the first couple years of releasing it. That's why he can pretty much do whatever he wants, including continuing to work on the game without charging additional money for it. And of course, it keeps selling more copies, and will for many years to come, so he has tons of money continuing to flood in.
He certainly seems like a pretty grounded guy, and it's nice that he tries to be cool about stuff, including not gouging the player base for more money. Being an individual has huge advantages compared to being a corporation, in some ways. A corporation would pretty much be obligated to maximize profit. He can just be pleased that he brings joy to millions of players, and has already made a fortune.
Yeah - I don't want to be too dismissive. I've read interviews with him, and despite his success, he hasn't measurably changed his lifestyle or fallen into the traps a big influx of money can cause. It honestly reminds me of No Man's Sky (minus the redempetion arc) where enough money was made from the base product that it funds ongoing development for the forseeable future.
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.
CA is too good for us.
I suppose that's nice. Although I do not see the problem with charging for updates, with multiplayer it's a problem because people might get pressured into buying something they might otherwise not get it because of friends, but with the single player game I can't see the issue. And why doesn't the dev deserve to be compensated?
Charging for updates isn't intrinsically bad. A good expansion pack at a fair price can be a good deal for both the players and the devs. But there is a modern trend of games trying to squeeze players for every dollar they can get; and when content is deliberately held back in the hopes of selling it for a bit more money later, it starts to become a bit perverse. The game itself can become an advertisement for selling more bits of the game in the future - and it just devalues the experience.
In the specific case of Stardew Valley, the game is a major hit - and it continues to sell well. So even though existing players are getting the new content for free, the developer is still going to get paid. Obviously he could get a lot more if he charged for it, but he has decided he doesn't need that. He'd rather just make the game as good as he can make it.
Here's a personal story of mine, about a different game:
Several years ago I was selected to be a beta tester for a major game franchise. I was a very well known member of that community, know for making custom balance patches and bugfixes - and so they wanted me to test their new release. I was pretty excited to be a part of that. But when I got my first beta copy, I didn't really play it much because the game barely worked. It crashed very frequently, and so my feedback was basically just "it crashes when I do this". I figured it wasn't worth trying to give balance ideas when the game was in that state. Anyway... time went on, and things didn't improve much. There were some graphics changes and a bit of UI work... but it was still super unstable. The release date was getting pretty close. But before it was even possible to do a full playthrough without constant reloads to dodge game-ending bugs, there was detailed plans posted on the beta forums talking about the first 4 DLC packs that would be released after the game launched.
I stopped taking AAA games seriously after that. I was totally disillusioned. They were launching their AAA game in non-functional state, with the hope of fixing the worst bugs in a day 1 patch. Very little useful playtesting was done, and so the features of the game were a bit slap-dash, but yet somehow they were dividing up content for as many DLCs packs as possible. They didn't even have a functional game and yet they were talking about how to sell more stuff. It was a real eye-opening experience for me; and it really colours the way I see other games that launch in a buggy state, where pretty much the only thing that works is the in-game store.
So yeah, I can appreciate the view that maybe charging for updates is a slippy slope that Concerned Ape doesn't want to step onto; even if he does have very solid footing for if he wanted to tread that ground a bit.
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.
Fucking legend
Rimworld devs sweatin' rn.
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 agree it doesn't change the core game only adds more Rimworld if you've exhausted the current content
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.
I miss old school “Expansions” like brood war etc
The Factorio Devs made this Blogpost some time ago about how to go forward with development. It basically boiled down to developing a big (paid) expansion pack. I would be totally fine with Stardew Valley doing the same. However, going for free updates was discarded for Factorio because they have a "smaller but more dedicated audience [compared to Terraria and Minecraft]". I don't think that applies to Stardew Valley so free updates might be the way to go.
I don't know so much about Terraria because I don't really play it but Minecraft makes most of its money through merchandise. The game is more vehicle to sell green plushies and funko pops than it is to make money itself.
Minecraft was just the example they used in the post but I agree. Minecraft is no indie game studio anymore atleast since Microsoft took over. But at least the free update policy hasn't changed since the takeover
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.
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
This sounds like a therat/promise of seppuku. What a legend.
What about an expansion. Could I pay you for that please?
Sure there's ways to just throw money at them if you want
How every game should be. Buy it and that's it, no more in-game purchases.
The game is closed-source. Who cares? It's already garbage at that point
Nice
Uhh... I guess it's not technically DLC, but ConcernedApe is selling the game soundtrack for $5 on Steam. It's in the game's DLC category, but unlike some other soundtracks on Steam, it's not dependent on owning the base game to purchase.
But it's also downloadable content, so it is DLC... I guess it depends on how you want to define DLC nowadays.
DLC in this context is pretty widely understood to mean in game content. So additional areas, cosmetics, missions, etc. not the soundtrack. Steam just categorizes the soundtracks as DLC for games in general.
Using this definition, the game itself is DLC. Almost everything on the internet is a form of Downloadable Content.
Is it possible the music has its own license and therefore warrants a separate listing?
It's being sold via ConcernedApe on that Steam page I linked in my previous comment. So he's earning the money from sales.
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".
Another excellent example of this working is Factorio.
The original game doesn't cost a fortune, it's made by a small extremely dedicated team. They polished it so hard the shine made everything else look like vanta black. Playing Factorio ruins other games because the depth and quality of everything else is so poor in comparison.
The game came out in like 2013 early access. Full release completed in 2020. A decade after initial launch, they are going to offer a DLC, that will cost money.
Absolutely happy to pay for a DLC for that perfection.
I'm not happy to pay money for that DLC.
Are you kidding me? Already have 1400 hours in the game. And if this DLC is gonna double the base game, I'm screwed.
Yeah factorio doesn't cost money, it costs you years of your life
I already spend so much time on Rimworld and Stellaris, if I get Factorio I’m sure my gf will leave me and I’ll be found fossilized in front of a monitor
Yup that's a good trinity, those wow and Minecraft are what I spent the most time doing in my life lmao
I'm at 5500 hours and haven't played since Jan 2023...
I'm so fucked
Drugs might be the better option at this point.
Soon...
IMO Wube (Factorio's devs) is a lot like ConcernedApe, when it comes to not violate the players' trust. That's why for example Factorio never goes on sales - because the people there believe that it would be disrespectful to charge a larger price to some than others, simply because the others delayed buying it. (Cough Paradox Interactive aka Hipsters' EA cough cough)
They also have the decency to offer you a demo so you can make an informed decision before buying it, in a clear contrast with certain companies that expect you to buy it blind.
About the DLC: I'm one who typically pirates games, mind you, but I'm probably buying it, just like I did mit the base game. The base game isn't incomplete or anything like that; fuck, people compare it with crack for a reason - it's functional, polished, and fun to the point of addictiveness. And the FFF (devlogs) clearly show enough content to be worth it.
Yep.
I pirated Factorio way back when it first came out (0.72?) and I actually didn't like it. It was... Bad.
A few months later someone suggested I give it another go, so I pirated it again. It was a lot better. Like way better. I did a couple of months and was like .. this is soooo good I'm buying it.
I will pre buy the dlc the moment it's available.
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.
Factorio DLC is going to break global productivity for a month when it's released in October.
Every single engineer and factorio fan I know have taken that day off. Nothing is getting engineered for like 4 days minimum
I've booked 3 days haha.
I've not touched factorio since Jan 2023. 5500 hours till then.
You would think that the kind of person who loves Factorio knows the rule: never book launch day off.
1.5 update, with the entire island, I'd have bought in a heartbeat! It was insane seeing all the added stuff!
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!
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
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
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.
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.
Bought on PC, Switch, Vita, phone… not even ashamed.
Bought it on Switch, bought it on PC... Don't even slightly regret the 2nd purchase!
I would rather buy it again or have the update/dlc released after some sort of community milestone in buying and giving away copies.
I really like the fact that its all one complete game and also every gaming person should have a copy, regardless if they can personally afford it.
Anything that is worked on for that long is fair game for versioning. It used to be that you bought a version of a software and it was yours for life, but if you wanted the new fancy stuff, you had to buy the new version.
Now it's either a subscription or an "app" model, how long can a developer continue to support a 3€ one-time-buy app with new features? Buyers run out sooner or later.
Go the Terraria route and sell merchandise!
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 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.
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.
I did the same. This game hits almost all the buttons for me.
Being an absolute Factorio addict, the only thing I miss is proper automation.
I mean, we could argue on whether his work is worth tens of times that of an average person, but I mean, there's people who make more and whose work is actually detrimental to society, so he's all right by me.
Actually, I want to go even further and say that I think his work actually is worth quite a bit. Not that he is worth that much, or others aren't (again, I don't know him), but he has given millions of people hours upon hours of enjoyment, and that's nothing to shake a stick at.
Yeah well that's the effect of the modern world, where works can be replicated effortlessly. Sucks if your work is producing physical goods that can't be copy/pasted.
You're not wrong. But "joy" isn't exactly fungible, so it's not really an apples-to-oranges comparison.
And what he's doing with it is also important. I haven't heard of him dumping millions into Trump's campaign or the Proud Boys or whatever.
And honestly, even if he did, my real respect is for the work that he did and the business model he used, not for him as a person. I don't know him at all. I don't even know his real name. I just meant that this way of doing software professionally should be more common.
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.
There is a difference between the DLC that is one and whatever the hell nowadays is practice. When its something like the eldenring DLC a dlc is absolutely fine.
Yeah but concerned ape added about half a game's content with that new island. Nobody would've blinked if they charged for it.
Absolutely.
This. It all boils down to value for money. 5 dollars for a skin cosmetic is bullshit. 5 dollars or more for DLC with meaningful content is okay.
If you're going to sell a DLC that is only a skin and people buy it, I don't have an issue. A skin adds nothing outside of "looks" and it's purely optional. If you the player want to pay for it, be my guest.
It's when games release a game that is unfinished, has bugs, and what should be a patch is sold as a DLC, I have problems with that.
Or when DLC adds a competitive advantage, that is just wrong. Like for $5 a month, you get extra "stability" in your scope, or the whole "pride and accomplishment" crates.
Those DLCs can go fuck themselves.
My issue with skins is that it is completely immersion breaking. You have Homelander and Gaia running around Call of Duty now. It's comical and just destroys my enjoyment of the game.
The skins get worse and worse because to continue the money machine they have to make more and more unique skins that just destroy the cohesion of the world they've built.
This is all there is to be said on the matter
Even if its 5(money) for a supporter item or skin it would be fine. Its different depending on the studio size.
Studio size has nothing to do with it, the only important matter here is whether the DLC is "required" or not. I'm fine with BS cosmetic DLC, that really doesn't matter, but when you promise features X, Y, and Z, and deliver X and Y but gate Z behind a DLC, that's unacceptable. I don't care if you're have 1000 employees or 1, that's wrong.
DLC should be for:
Oh it does, if a small Studio releases a DLC wich just does a little (still in the lines you gave 100% agree on that) more story or adds a minigame or a new game mode or maybe even new game+ its ok (for a non outrageous price) if a big studio makes a dlc, my expectations are also higher.
Elden Ring's DLC is pretty atypical though, even as far as DLCs are concerned. Comparing it to past FromSoftware DLCs for Dark Souls, Shadow of the Erd Tree is like the size of all of the Dark Souls DLCs combined.
Expecting every DLC to match Shadow of the Erd Tree is setting yourself up for disappointment. Would it be nice? Of course, but it would be unrealistic to expect every DLC to match it.
Absolutely but its the standard studios should be aiming for or at least in this direction and not whatsoever EA and Paradox are doing.
While I agree EA and Paradox are lazy in making DLC, studios should absolutely not be aiming to make every DLC like Shadow of the Erd Tree. That would only lead to studio closures and developer disappointment when they ultimately fail to meet that very high standard.
I would rather developers stick to making something that they realistically can, that way they can finish it and get the satisfaction of completing a DLC they wanted to make than get burned out making something with too big of a scope for their team.
I think i worded it wrong, aiming to be was meant as in taking notes on what it did right and doing something similarly right With their product. It wasn't meant to mean that they all need to put another game into it or aim for impossible things.
Ah, I see. Then in that case, sure. As long as developers take the note that they should make the best product that they possibly can, then I agree.
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.
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 :
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.
I don’t think charging for content is the problem, it’s just the way some companies do it.
Exactly. A good content DLC should be similar to buying a new game, but cheaper for both the devs and players.
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.
Sure. He made many millions of dollars within the first couple years of releasing it. That's why he can pretty much do whatever he wants, including continuing to work on the game without charging additional money for it. And of course, it keeps selling more copies, and will for many years to come, so he has tons of money continuing to flood in.
He certainly seems like a pretty grounded guy, and it's nice that he tries to be cool about stuff, including not gouging the player base for more money. Being an individual has huge advantages compared to being a corporation, in some ways. A corporation would pretty much be obligated to maximize profit. He can just be pleased that he brings joy to millions of players, and has already made a fortune.
Yeah - I don't want to be too dismissive. I've read interviews with him, and despite his success, he hasn't measurably changed his lifestyle or fallen into the traps a big influx of money can cause. It honestly reminds me of No Man's Sky (minus the redempetion arc) where enough money was made from the base product that it funds ongoing development for the forseeable future.
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.
CA is too good for us.
I suppose that's nice. Although I do not see the problem with charging for updates, with multiplayer it's a problem because people might get pressured into buying something they might otherwise not get it because of friends, but with the single player game I can't see the issue. And why doesn't the dev deserve to be compensated?
Charging for updates isn't intrinsically bad. A good expansion pack at a fair price can be a good deal for both the players and the devs. But there is a modern trend of games trying to squeeze players for every dollar they can get; and when content is deliberately held back in the hopes of selling it for a bit more money later, it starts to become a bit perverse. The game itself can become an advertisement for selling more bits of the game in the future - and it just devalues the experience.
In the specific case of Stardew Valley, the game is a major hit - and it continues to sell well. So even though existing players are getting the new content for free, the developer is still going to get paid. Obviously he could get a lot more if he charged for it, but he has decided he doesn't need that. He'd rather just make the game as good as he can make it.
Here's a personal story of mine, about a different game: Several years ago I was selected to be a beta tester for a major game franchise. I was a very well known member of that community, know for making custom balance patches and bugfixes - and so they wanted me to test their new release. I was pretty excited to be a part of that. But when I got my first beta copy, I didn't really play it much because the game barely worked. It crashed very frequently, and so my feedback was basically just "it crashes when I do this". I figured it wasn't worth trying to give balance ideas when the game was in that state. Anyway... time went on, and things didn't improve much. There were some graphics changes and a bit of UI work... but it was still super unstable. The release date was getting pretty close. But before it was even possible to do a full playthrough without constant reloads to dodge game-ending bugs, there was detailed plans posted on the beta forums talking about the first 4 DLC packs that would be released after the game launched.
I stopped taking AAA games seriously after that. I was totally disillusioned. They were launching their AAA game in non-functional state, with the hope of fixing the worst bugs in a day 1 patch. Very little useful playtesting was done, and so the features of the game were a bit slap-dash, but yet somehow they were dividing up content for as many DLCs packs as possible. They didn't even have a functional game and yet they were talking about how to sell more stuff. It was a real eye-opening experience for me; and it really colours the way I see other games that launch in a buggy state, where pretty much the only thing that works is the in-game store.
So yeah, I can appreciate the view that maybe charging for updates is a slippy slope that Concerned Ape doesn't want to step onto; even if he does have very solid footing for if he wanted to tread that ground a bit.
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.
Fucking legend
Rimworld devs sweatin' rn.
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 agree it doesn't change the core game only adds more Rimworld if you've exhausted the current content
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.
I miss old school “Expansions” like brood war etc
The Factorio Devs made this Blogpost some time ago about how to go forward with development. It basically boiled down to developing a big (paid) expansion pack. I would be totally fine with Stardew Valley doing the same. However, going for free updates was discarded for Factorio because they have a "smaller but more dedicated audience [compared to Terraria and Minecraft]". I don't think that applies to Stardew Valley so free updates might be the way to go.
I don't know so much about Terraria because I don't really play it but Minecraft makes most of its money through merchandise. The game is more vehicle to sell green plushies and funko pops than it is to make money itself.
Minecraft was just the example they used in the post but I agree. Minecraft is no indie game studio anymore atleast since Microsoft took over. But at least the free update policy hasn't changed since the takeover
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.
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
This sounds like a therat/promise of seppuku. What a legend.
What about an expansion. Could I pay you for that please?
Sure there's ways to just throw money at them if you want
How every game should be. Buy it and that's it, no more in-game purchases.
The game is closed-source. Who cares? It's already garbage at that point
Nice
Uhh... I guess it's not technically DLC, but ConcernedApe is selling the game soundtrack for $5 on Steam. It's in the game's DLC category, but unlike some other soundtracks on Steam, it's not dependent on owning the base game to purchase.
But it's also downloadable content, so it is DLC... I guess it depends on how you want to define DLC nowadays.
DLC in this context is pretty widely understood to mean in game content. So additional areas, cosmetics, missions, etc. not the soundtrack. Steam just categorizes the soundtracks as DLC for games in general.
Using this definition, the game itself is DLC. Almost everything on the internet is a form of Downloadable Content.
Is it possible the music has its own license and therefore warrants a separate listing?
It's being sold via ConcernedApe on that Steam page I linked in my previous comment. So he's earning the money from sales.