Freeloadable Content - our alternative to Paid DLC

#1

(This is not the big announcement, but I just heard back from our relevant contact over at Big-Announcement-Type-Folks, so maybe I’ll have something to announce by the end of the week).

More relevantly, I just posted a new http://www.fortressofdoors.com/2012/07/freeloadable-content-alternative-to.html. Many people have asked us whether we’ll be releasing DLC or expansion packs in the future. We’ve promised of course that we will be releasing free updates (gold edition, bug fixes, new features, etc) for the life of the project, but we hadn’t decided whether we would additionally make some “bonus content” - such as official total conversion mods and the like - available for purchase as paid DLC.

After thinking about it, I’ve concluded that paid DLC is fundamentally broken, for both the developer and the player. The blog post goes into full details. I talked the idea over with Anthony, and he thought it was a good idea, too.

A quick summary for those who didn’t RTFA:

Instead of selling DLC after we’ve developed it to cover its funding, we instead go to the community and ask them for the money to justify its development by running a small kickstarter asking for a modest amount. If it works, we make the DLC and release it to all owners of the game as a free update.

So, in the future, if we ever ask money for a DLC pack, we will do it under the “FreeLC” model.

http://www.fortressofdoors.com/2012/07/freeloadable-content-alternative-to.html has full details and addresses possible problems with the model.

What do you think?

#2

It’s an interesting idea and I’m curious to see if it goes well.

I don’t see how it could work for any dlc after the first though. The prizes won’t be as interesting a second time around and everyone who will see it will probably already have the game. The kickstarter audience is limited afterall.

I think that a good way to make it bigger and more enticing would be to put future DLCs are stretch goals. Something like

5k - 1 DLC
10k - 2 DLCs
15k - 3…
and so on

It would give fans a lot more to look forward to and make their bids seem more rewarding. It would also tell you how far you can push the game before you have to move on to another project.

#3

That’s a cool idea! Definitely something to throw into the pot.

#4

Wrathak - an interesting point, but I’m not sure I fully understand. What would stop a second campaign from working? For example, let’s say we do one FreeLC successfully. Then, we decide to do another expansion with a few new classes, new maps, etc. The “prize” is that everyone gets an expanded game. If players like the game and want more to it, why wouldn’t a second kickstarter work? Yes, I agree that you’ll have diminishing success each time, but it doesn’t seem like an immediate death sentence on round 2 if round 1 is successful and everyone is satisfied with the results. It’s essentially group contracting to hire us to create more of the game.

#5

Not a death sentence obviously, a second might work, hell even a third if lucky :slight_smile:

I’m saying this from my perspective as a possible backer (Obviously I only represent people with the same personality as me). Here are some issues that pop in my mind when I think of making a new kickstarter for each dlc

-Kickstarter fatigue (imagine if it becomes popular and other games do the same as well)
-Little reason to donate (let other people do it, my money won’t matter) (mostly psychological)
-Having to think of new rewards and prepare a new kickstarter each time = lots of work
-More likely not to like that particular dlc idea

The advantages I see for putting all DLC ideas in a single kickstarter

-You can put all the dlc ideas you want and make people vote for which ones they want
-More reason to donate (Oh god, This DLC would be so great but it’s the third most popular. Here’s $5!)

I also see possible advantages for making multiple kickstarters. Frequent exposure might increase interest and the possibility of stretch goals for particular DLCs might make it enticing to donate.

Truth be told, I have a hard time predicting which would have the most success. I know that personally a bigger kickstarter with all the dlcs would increase the odds of me donating dramatically but I am just one person. Do I represent the minority or the majority? :slight_smile:

I think the only way to find out would be trial and error

EDIT:

I’ve thought about it some more and I think the biggest problem I have with a single DLC is the lack of possible stretch goals. Those are very important, they allow people to dream of what could be and make them want to give more. You can’t really put many stretch goals on a dlc because you run the risk of turning it into an expansion, which would take much longer. Instead of having 1 dlc every 3 months, you might end up having to wait 9 months for it because it got stretched to 15k. It would also allow for more diversity.

I think what I’m advocating for is to make other DLCs as stretch goals instead of making the single one bigger. And even if out of the 6 ideas only 2 are funded, there are no reasons why you can’t make another kickstarter campaign for the remaining 4 once the 2 are finished.

#6

Thanks for the reply - that helps explain a lot, and I agree with I think just about everything you said. :slight_smile: Good analysis, and obviously you’re not a prophet (as far as I’m aware) but you make good points. I uh, don’t have much to add, haha. It’ll be an interesting experiment if we decide to do it, and I agree that going with a single Kickstarter with stretch goals makes the most sense.