Ludeon Forums

 First of all, credit to Sir Kitteh for mentioning this off-hand and inspiring me to write this post.

I love Rimworld. It's great. However, Tynan has made some note-worthy remarks about it.

Firstly (https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/comments/7qh746/next_patch_will_be_10_confirmed_by_tynan/dsplgc1/):

QuoteFive years. I figure five years is a decent enough place. Five years are enough for $30. Five years are enough to call a game finished.

And secondly (https://ludeon.com/blog/2017/11/rimworld-beta-18-a-world-of-story-is-released/):

QuoteThe "Beta" designation means that we're on the final stretch before the 1.0 release, and that there won't be major content additions like whole new game systems. Of course we will almost certainly add more content, before the 1.0 release or after.

So, what I get from that is (and anybody feel free to prove me wrong) that it's no longer economically viable, nor sustainable to put more time into the game at it's current price. It's just not justifiable. That being said, what if we could justify it?
The previous DLCs (Name in The Game, Backstory, Pirate King) were all certainly nice donations that helped fund development more than anything, but they weren't very. . . substantive. It was understood that purchasing them wasn't going to change the game - adding text and numbers being as simple as it is - in any major way, though that was the point. DLC for an incomplete or early access game doesn't have the best track-record. (https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-09-05-ark-fans-burned-by-scorched-earth-the-early-access-games-completely-finished-expansion) That being said, Rimworld's not going to be incomplete for much longer. 1.0's around the corner, and with it, less major game-changing additions (I assume).

If I've interpreted Tynan correctly, 1.0 means

• A slowing in development, as it'll be complete.
• No "major content additions".

However, I still get the feeling that Tynan would still work on it if there was more incentive to do so, he even mentions that he enjoys working on it in the first link provided. This leads me to believe that if there was a demand for DLC to add additional content to the game. Of course, justifying yet more time put into it would require more money, so people can eat and future projects can be funded.

So, what do you think that you and the general public would pay for, and what would it be? I'm not talking about random "suggestions"-worthy stuff here, like quality-of-life additions or "this one really cool idea for a gun/animal/armor." Perhaps it's my own definition, but I'd wager that the DLC would need to be capable of changing how you play with or interact with the game.  For example: there are the various works of Dubwise (https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197976408970/myworkshopfiles/). Rimatomics adds a whole new level of technology and tools to the game, with their own processes to maintain and use all of them. Focusing on them can change how a colony looks and functiones, though you could still ignore it entirely if you so chose. Hygiene can be boiled down as adding a few more meters. It's endgame doesn't do more but add a shower and a toilet to the list of other essential things your pawn needs to exist, like eat and sleep. It's getting there that's interesting. Laying plumbing networks, building water towers and sewage treatment stations, it's all very interesting. Ignoring those processes mean a disease-ridden and broken colony, but managing them doesn't change the game too drastically. MarsX is a whole other beast, however. It builds on Rimworld like Long War did for XCOM. Interestingly enough, they all fit in with the base game perfectly. Playing with them all feel like another layer of depth in an already interesting game, and I could at least see myself paying to play with them and have the rough edges sanded off.

You DO realize he directly said development has not stopped, correct..?  And that there will be more content after 1.0, just not major systems.  That's exactly how software development is supposed to work, at least if you have bills to pay.  Development of new content ALWAYS slows after the initial release of a given game.

Let the game grow up and walk ???.

There's also the matter that $60 isn't exactly "chump change".  You're proposing a AAA price for an indie game, and I think that would strongly hurt sales.

Quote from: Bozobub on May 23, 2018, 09:51:05 PM
You DO realize he directly said development has not stopped, correct..?  And that there will be more content after 1.0, just not major systems.  That's exactly how software development is supposed to work, at least if you have bills to pay.  Development of new content ALWAYS slows after the initial release of a given game.

Let the game grow up and walk ???.

There's also the matter that $60 isn't exactly "chump change".  You're proposing a AAA price for an indie game, and I think that would strongly hurt sales.

I didn't claim that Tynan was stopping or would stop development. I didn't say there would be no more content after 1.0, though I did say that the content that would be included would not be major systems. There is no book on how software development is supposed to work. $60 is not chump change.

Now that that's out.

Don't Starve is an incredibly successful indie game. It goes for about $15. It currently has two DLC both priced at $4.99 with an additional DLC with details to be announced. If that one follows trends, we have an additional $15, for a total of $30: Double the additional asking price. Currently, the base game and all of it's DLC have an "Overwhelmingly positive" review score. However, this adds-up to nearly the price of Rimworld as a base game.

XCOM 2 is also a successful game, though not quite "indie." It is sitting at a "Very Positive" score at $60. While it's DLC is nowhere near as well-reviewed as Don't Starve's, note which have poor reviews. War of The Chosen ($40) and Shen's Last Gift ($10) are both fairly major content contributors (or at least, non cosmetic/randomly-send-a-super-strong-enemy-to-attack-you-which-are-only-weak-to-one-of-a-kind-weapons content) and have ratings on-par with the base game. This (in addition to a handful of other DLC) result in up-to and exceeding $120 dollars. Double not-chump-change.

I don't see why Rimworld - which has a similar amount of reviews despite a better rating to XCOM 2 - would be an exception, as it is already beloved by the community and has been since before electricity was a feature (https://ludeon.com/blog/2013/07/electricity-and-screenshots/). Yes, the reviews are mixed and the added content is quite simple, but the Name in Game Access DLC has sold an equivalence of fifteen and a half copies of the base game if you assumed that the reviewers are the only ones that bought it. Imagine what something more enticing could do!

But beside of these example games, Rimworld got a much bigger modding community these these games.
Sure not every mod change the gameplay that completly like MarsX or HCSK, but you realy can call these DLC's.
So Rimworld isn't even released and got alot of DLC's IMO :-)

Quote from: Call me Arty on May 23, 2018, 09:34:46 PM
...So, what I get from that is (and anybody feel free to prove me wrong) that it's no longer economically viable, nor sustainable to put more time into the game at it's current price. It's just not justifiable. That being said, what if we could justify it?

I believe you got the concept wrong. What I think of Tynan statements is not a financial one, it's a creative problem. Because in the end, You gotta ship the game.

There are features that could only be implemented if you broke almost half the game and started over again. If I am not mistaken, Rimworld has over 100.000 lines of code, you could argue that Rimworld could be an even better game and bring even more sales to Ludeon Studion if they did X or Y. But even if it was "worth it", You gotta ship the game someday.

I believe that Rimworld has done it's mission even before beta launch. It sucessed in sales, got a silver medals and a bronze one in steam top sales, rocked the industry with interviews on major sites and brought fun to Millions of gamers and Dank Memes.

Err.. answering your question, there are no DLC that could justify this.

Even if I never were to play Rimworld again, I would still be happy and grateful for the experience the game has provided me. And I believe many other think the same.

What I got from this experience, is a new studio to follow and eagerness to see what they come up with next. So no DLC, no addition content, from someone that has seen this game grow since A3, I truly believe that this game has been done.

Rather than making DLC at this point, I'd prefer Tynan work on Rimworld 2, with a new engine and new UI capable of supporting and visualizing z levels, along with better fluid mechanics so that water behaves appropriately in a 3D environment.

IE, basically take more of what Dwarf Fortress has, made user friendly.  That's IMO what made RimWorld so successful in the first place.

I'd pay $60 for that, in a heartbeat.

Ken

Quote from: Listen1 on May 24, 2018, 07:23:21 AM
I believe you got the concept wrong. What I think of Tynan statements is not a financial one, it's a creative problem. Because in the end, You gotta ship the game.

. . .

Err.. answering your question, there are no DLC that could justify this.

Even if I never were to play Rimworld again, I would still be happy and grateful for the experience the game has provided me. And I believe many other think the same.

What I got from this experience, is a new studio to follow and eagerness to see what they come up with next. So no DLC, no addition content, from someone that has seen this game grow since A3, I truly believe that this game has been done.

I appreciate the perspective from someone who's been with the game for as long as you have (before A-double-digits, that's some commitment). However, I'd like to counter that from a similar position.

I pre-ordered Don't Starve, and have since acquired the DLC. I saw it evolve from a fairly simple, stylized survival game to one of the best and most interesting of it's genre (not unlike Rimworld). From it's fairly basic beginning, it acquired seasons, new characters, it added magic and developed an interesting story (stories, if you count the z-levels ;) ). It was a complete package, and lived up to the support and price.
And then, Reign of The Giants was released. The first of the expansions. This built on everything you loved about the base game without feeling like they chopped-off any part of it for later profit. The new giants and environments were a welcome addition that added a new challenge and threat to those already existing, while building upon the existing weirdness we love so much.
I'll skip Together, as I'm not expecting multiplayer anytime soon. Although, it did add a great amount of more hours to the game, and satisfied a long-awaited community request.
Shipwrecked was, well, holy crap. There's a lot of constants in the game, one of the strictest ones being "water is an obstacle you can't surpass" (Déjà vu). You know what happened? Boats. Now, that was something. Now it was an entirely new brand of exploration and discovery. It added a whole new layer to the game that gave an entirely new option of how to play, and it was super fun! Even those who aren't the biggest fan of the additional complexity couldn't argue with how much it added.
Going off all of this, I'm greatly interested in Hamlet. It looks like another interesting expansion. If it's got any of the quality of the base game and it's additional content, it'll be spectacular. With that being the third $5 DLC (I assume, no price as of yet). . . I guess you could say that paying for the equivalent of two copies of the games is justified. The base game was shipped, and it's obvious that the developers have enjoyed adding even after the fact.

A complete game is fine. You could put two eggs in a pan and call it an omelette, and later add bacon, cheese, mushrooms, etc, but it wouldn't mean the just-eggs were incomplete. . . if that makes any sense.

Also notable is what a DLC could mean for mods. Canute raises a good point here.

Quote from: Canute on May 24, 2018, 05:21:53 AM
. . . Rimworld got a much bigger modding community [than] these games.
Sure not every mod change the gameplay that completly like MarsX or HCSK, but you realy can call these DLC's.
So Rimworld isn't even released and got alot of DLC's IMO :-)

Pretty neat point, right? Thing is, more systems and bits of code to manipulate just means more potential mods. In a world where we never had electricity, it's highly unlikely that Rimatomics would come to exist. Without the complicated physiology of pawns, mods such as Bad Hygiene and EPOE/RBSE would have likely not come about. Even small things, like adding art, led to the "more statues" mod. While we have plenty to go off of (Take, for example, the ability to have a Lovecraftian cult of vampiric feline werewolves who have a dinosaur farm), more systems just mean that the community has so much more to make! More focus on features such as questing could lead to adventure-based mods, with entire stories. Making some feature like the ability to visit the moon(s) of your planet could lead to modders making expansive galaxies of everything from movie locations to their own original content. We just need some intensive to get Tynan to that point, perhaps. The finished game's soon to be out, why not add to it?
 

Quote from: kenmtraveller on May 24, 2018, 02:35:48 PM
Rather than making DLC at this point, I'd prefer Tynan work on Rimworld 2, with a new engine and new UI capable of supporting and visualizing z levels, along with better fluid mechanics so that water behaves appropriately in a 3D environment.

IE, basically take more of what Dwarf Fortress has, made user friendly.  That's IMO what made RimWorld so successful in the first place.

I'd pay $60 for that, in a heartbeat.

I don't want to delve into semantics, but throwing around that number is pretty serious. With all the content that's been added, why do you think that Minecraft hasn't had a sequel, but games like Borderlands have?
Rimworld isn't constrained by the things a normal game might be. We won't run out of story, and it's way easier to add content than, say, Call of Duty. It's similar to the giant time gap between versions of windows.

The things I want in Rimworld can't be achieved without an engine and UI rewrite.  And that isn't going to fit in the scope of DLC, which are essentially additive.

I interpreted his comments as saying he was burned out on the project (and after five years who wouldn't be?) and wanted to go do something else for awhile, not that he couldn't continue working on RW.

If RW is going to have DLC/expansions - and I suspect it will, since it has a fairly large audience - I'd expect each individual element to cost less than the game does, maybe in the $10/$15/$20 range depending on the size and complexity. (They could also do something like Stellaris does - "here's a free update that overhauls the problems with feature X, and a paid DLC that adds a bunch of new content having to do with feature X".)

As for what I'd like to see:
- alien worlds, biomes, and creatures, either on their own or mixed in with familiar ones.
- more differentiation on the world map. Distribution of different resources, factions, animals, hazards etc. across different parts of the planet, encouraging travel and exploration. Events and effects that would exist on the overworld map and impact multiple tiles.
- improved events-that-aren't-raids handling, and in general a lesser emphasis on an ever-increasing cycle of raids as the primary threat. Barring that, improved squad AI and a more flexible system for handling when, how, and why settlements get raided.
- enhanced factions. More distinct factions, more diplomatic gameplay, and more of an overworld presence for factions e.g. borders, inter-faction conflicts. Perhaps even an event chain that allows a colony that's proven themselves sufficiently (through means at least as arduous as the ship invitation) to permanently join a faction as a path to victory.

This is by no means an exhaustive list, just some of the things I'd find personally interesting.

Quote from: Call me Arty on May 23, 2018, 09:34:46 PM

QuoteFive years. I figure five years is a decent enough place. Five years are enough for $30. Five years are enough to call a game finished.

I don't pay for the developers time.  I don't see why that's relevant to the consumer when it comes to price and the "actual state" of the game.

It's too premature to talk about DLC here.  Yeah, you can call it done but it's highly likely that a lot of work is still needed even after hitting 1.0.  I'm not trying to be negative, but to me, there's a lot of polish and additional content that needs to be implemented before justifying the already $30 price tag.  So if 1.0 doesn't change my opinion all that much on the game, then DLC would actually rub me the wrong way.   

Quote from: Jibbles on May 24, 2018, 09:51:59 PM
It's too premature to talk about DLC here.

Oh, don't worry, I realized that the moment I hit "post".

One can go back and forth and argue what would be worth double the content. Honestly, a quick check through the weekly Reddit suggestion thread would suffice.

Simply put, if there's a justification, it should be priced accordingly. So something along the lines of:

5$ : More animals, more backstories, more clothes, more armor, etc. Things even the most amateur of modders can add.
10$ : Questlines, more buildings that encourage different playstyles, vehicles, etc. Things like Rim of Madness, Star Wars, and the like.
15$ : The z-axis.

I kid. But I understand Tynan's been working on a single project for five years and there comes a time where you need to stop. Whether he adds DLC or starts working on Rimworld 2, or another completely different IP, you bet your butt he already has my money.

Quote from: Jibbles on May 24, 2018, 09:51:59 PM
I don't pay for the developers time.  I don't see why that's relevant to the consumer when it comes to price and the "actual state" of the game.

I don't disagree with you, but 5 years is a ridiculous amount of time to spend on a single game. Only indie developers can dedicate that much time to one thing, because they don't have to worry as much about the cost of wages eating into their profits, or a board of directors who expect ever-increasing sales numbers.

Quote from: kenmtraveller on May 24, 2018, 08:03:04 PM
The things I want in Rimworld can't be achieved without an engine and UI rewrite.  And that isn't going to fit in the scope of DLC, which are essentially additive.

This.
For a DLC to be optional (in other words, you don't ask some people to pay for it and then give it to everyone for free) it would need to be modular, which limits the potential depth. Modders have done amazing things up to a certain level, and have extended the life of the game far beyond the point at which I would have been able to stand Vanilla... to focus on making large official mods at this point almost feels a little redundant. When I think about what I want for Rimworld, it's core fundamental changes that dramatically expand the gameplay possibilities and open up a whole new world of modding options for the community to fill in content.

I get the idea of a "game mode", similar to what Don't Starve did. For instance, a full focus on and support for migratory gameplay like boats or vehicle/animal caravans. After seeing The Final Station, I always imagined how cool it would be to travel a network of abandoned railways on makeshift trains, repairing or constructing tracks and engines and exploring POI's. Of course, part of that would be the possibility of running a colony INSIDE of the train with different functionality depending on the size, technology, whether it's moving or stopped, access to resources etc.. There's certainly plenty of story-building opportunities there. But every good idea comes with a whole slew of dependencies... Rimworld is a game of static colony management. There's nothing to find out in the world except new randomly-generated maps, hostile colonies are a few buildings and mobs milling around waiting to be shot and neutral colonies are entirely off-screen, so the concept of "exploring" would need to actually be supported first before you built a game mode around the WAY in which you go out and explore. And that's assuming you don't significantly change the way the code handles terrain generation, which means you're still left with either a stripped-down colony map while a macro pointer traverses the world map, waiting for you to stop to generate a camp. Remember, a new game mode needs to be significantly more than what you can currently do. $20 to add boats that let pawns move on water and let you travel over oceans and rivers in the world view would feel a little bit unrewarding, as there's only a static amount of additional gameplay possibilities being added.

Quote from: Call me Arty on May 24, 2018, 03:51:46 PM

I appreciate the perspective from someone who's been with the game for as long as you have (before A-double-digits, that's some commitment). However, I'd like to counter that from a similar position.
....
A complete game is fine. You could put two eggs in a pan and call it an omelette, and later add bacon, cheese, mushrooms, etc, but it wouldn't mean the just-eggs were incomplete. . . if that makes any sense.

Ah, thanks, and also love your food analogy. Made alot of sense and added a new perspective into this subject.

In my argument I was thinking about "mechanical features" like multiple-screen maps,  Z-levels, 3D textures, and many other things. Content in this sense, like "Water system", a bar below food and another conduit and events, could be a DLC... but I believe that modders already took care of that.

I don't know how strong modding was in Don't Starve, but Darkest Dungeon is a game with DLC and modded content(preeeeeetty weird modded content). The DLCs are full with Mechanics, Characters, Events and Buildings, while modded content are majorly cosmetic and QoL.

But for Rimworld as a game, I don't know of any content/mechanic that the Dev's can put into the game that a modder couldn't, and modders can't put stuff like Z levels because of the same reason the Devs dont.

That's why I don't think that a paid DLC will be a good option for Rimworld. There's so much a single game can do once you go past the 1000 hours mark. To me, for better or worse, this game is finished.

its not correct to compare AAA projects with RimWorld. AAA projects developing as a rule with a large team of developers and the costs are much higher. RimWorld most of the time developing for a 2-3 people. RimWorld was sold already more then with 1 million copies, some of it with a special packs for more then 1000$ each. In addition RimWorld received from kickstarter and has already been sold for several years before steam release  + some income from other sources.. So, if iam not mistaken, according to approximate estimates the RimWorld could bring about ~40-50 million dollars to its creators. Don't forget that the game developing with a 2-3 people. This is not enough to start make not-free DLCs? Its certainly a joke about DLS, bcs do not know how Ludeon going to make a soon release when a game really not ready. Declared opportunities still not resolved. The game optimization is terrible.. iam not talking about multithreading. The game even unable to use the opportunities of a single core. In 2018 year still in 32bit. Soon mobile phones will only work on 64 bit  :-\ What a DLC? Please, make the game first. Modders already have run into modding limitations, bcs of game optimization. Z-levels are possible in Rimworld, the game already using Vector3 graphic. Some mods like Combat Extended using 3D for shooting mechanic. All of this is impossible only because of game optimization. We have reached the moment, when modders started to make mods with game optimization(!!!), while the developers write "its so long and hard to make multithreading... we sold 1 million copies of the game and can't hire an additional developer for optimization".

I'd pay for z-levels.

Rimworld has already given me far more than enough content to justify $30. If I had paid $60 I would have gotten great value. I have over 1000 hours in the game so it's easily worth $100 to me at this point. By comparison I have spent over $100 on Stellaris and it's apparently endless stream of paid DLC and I have maybe half the hours in that game. I don't plan to give any more of my money to Paradox Interactive, because they have not matched the quality and polish that Ludeon Studios has delivered in Rimworld.

Knowing what LS can do, if they released an expansion or a Rimworld 2.0 I would have great faith in the project. I think it's a great company with a strong ethos for meeting obligations and delivering lots of good content without demanding more cash every time they expand the game. I paid for a copy, I got 100% of every update as promised, and I never was asked to pay an extra cent nor did I ever have to. So if they released a major content addition after 1.0, and asked a reasonable price, I would almost certainly buy it. I'd probably even pre-order, which is something I am normally wary of, because I trust LS to deliver.

DLC could result in the community and modding-scene completly falling apart as now everyone has this dlc or that dlc or all dlc or no dlc installed.

Quote from: Bozobub on May 23, 2018, 09:51:05 PM
You DO realize he directly said development has not stopped, correct..?  And that there will be more content after 1.0, just not major systems.  That's exactly how software development is supposed to work, at least if you have bills to pay.  Development of new content ALWAYS slows after the initial release of a given game.

Or at least the adding of new features can slow/stop in favor of more polish. Rimworld is a great game, but in need of many QoL and performance improvements. So far, these always kind of fell away in favor of more stuff.

Quote from: Headshotkill on June 01, 2018, 01:20:34 PM
DLC could result in the community and modding-scene completly falling apart as now everyone has this dlc or that dlc or all dlc or no dlc installed.

If Hugslibs, Alien Framework, or Jectstools were deleted today, the modding community would be crippled. These are important, because they are the foundation for a lot of things that you would otherwise not be able to do. Currently, Rimworld is limiting the kinds of mods that can be made. Due to the way it's build, it's extremely unlikely we'll see a first person camera, unlikely that vehicles will be overly functional, we'll see half-blocks that function as such, and many other things that are either impossible in the current game or could only be made in an imperfect or abstract way.

As Rimworld is reaching the final stretches of major development (as can be assumed from the information we have now) the modding community is likely to soon reach a stagnation point of possibility. Thusly, DLC that adds new systems would open up so many more possibilities for modding. We've seen examples time and time again. The capacity for making recipes is added, we get Rimsenal. The ability to add custom meters is added, we get Cosmic Horrors and Bad Hygiene. If You want advice for DLC, XCOM 2 has added a fair amount of them, and the vanilla game hasn't suffered at all. There are still plenty (majority, even) of mods that can be accessed with no additional content, but modders just use the additional assets and tools found in those expansions. I know that at the very least, The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth, has had dozens of "impossible" items made possible due to the additional ways to screw with things.

I'd pay $10-15 for whatever optimizations are required for me to play the game with dozens of mods and 100+ pawns without the game slowing down to unplayable levels.

Quote from: Headshotkill on June 01, 2018, 01:20:34 PM
DLC could result in the community and modding-scene completly falling apart as now everyone has this dlc or that dlc or all dlc or no dlc installed.

I don't think it would.  The most heavily modded games of all time (Skyrim, Fallout 4, New Vegas) all had several large DLC packages each.

"it's no longer economically viable, nor sustainable to put more time into the game at it's current price. It's just not justifiable."

reducing things to terms like that makes it easy to think that the shadow is the substance.
in other words, who says it's true? it's not "economically viable" you mean you want more money for what you're doing or else you're gonna stop doing it. That's it.

I think this game i great and i can accept payed additions. Im new player in this game, buyed 2 days ago. Now i have problem with registation on steam buyed game (29,99$). If i not resolve this problem i will must probably buy another version. Payed patches maybe can resolve stealed illegal version and scams which are popular today.