Support NeoGAF

[TheVoidDragon]

Paradox Interactive's games are currently being flooded with poor steam reviews as a result of sudden price increases for their games and DLC in multiple regions, with the reason being given as:

Hey gang,
As you have noticed prices for our products have increased in certain regions around the globe and this is something we've intentionally done. The reason for this is to make our prices match the purchasing power of those areas, as well as create a more equal price point for our products across the globe.

Our prices have remained pretty much the same for several years and it's only natural for us to re-evaluate price points at regular intervals based on the strength of various currencies, fluctuations in world markets and many other factors. This is something that all publishers do and we are no exception.

Sadly this means that the price has gone up for certain regions and whilst this is something we'd like to avoid, it's necessary to keep our price point more in line with our other markets. We sincerely apologize for any frustration this may cause and hope you can understand why we are doing this.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/price-increase.1022680/#post-22833834

Their games have suddenly got a large amount of bad reviews on Steam because of this. From reddit:

EU4 down to Mostly Negative with 29% positive
CK2 down to Mixed with 40% positive
HoI4 down to Mixed with 58% positive
Victoria 2 down to Mixed with 48% positive
Stellaris down to Mixed with 63% positive

This just seems absurd to me. Their reason basically seems to be "You seem to have more money than last time we checked, so you can give us more from now on". They say this is something other publishers do but i can't recall any prices increases of old games like this before. Paradox seem to have fairly bad buisness practices overall, they released unfinished games that need 'fixing' with overpriced DLC, with patches that seem more temporary fixes that they then need to go back over later on to do properly, and now they're increasing their prices suddenly.

It's right before the Steam summer sale as well.

 

[Cels]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

 

[Turin Turambar]

So,how much the price increased?

 

[ExoSoul]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

Pretty much this, always sucks a bit on the consumer side on those regions but they're just keeping the price point in line across multiple currencies unless they actually increased it further than that.

 

[His Majesty]

Paradox is already milking its fanbase (including me) dry with all their overpriced DLC. Not surprised people are becoming pissed.

Despite that Europa Universalis IV is one of the best games of all time and you should go buy it right now.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

I mean, I'd be less wary if the price didn't seem to go up for all regions, with no drops.

 

[Vinter]

Based on what I have read on the Paradox forums it seems like price increase hits some countries harder than others. Paradox are well within their right to do this, but it has been handled a bit poorly PR wise imo.

 

[Gbraga]

It would make sense if it was true. Brazil's economy is still awful, and I'd say that my purchasing power has only lowered for a few years now, so it's weird to me that they'd increase the prices here because we're apparently loaded now.

I don't even think the current prices are unfair, as they're still lower than the US ones, but the reasoning is bullshit.

Should've just kept the "we wanted more global parity" part, and maybe added something about key resellers or the exchange rate or whatever. It would suck, but it'd be understandable. Namco increased their prices here as well last year, but at least they didn't, as far as I know, tell me that it's because I have more money now. That's kind of insulting.

 

[LycanXIII]

Prices tend to go down, the older they get, not up.

Victoria II released in 2010, Crusader Kings II in 2012, and Europa Universalis IV in 2013.

I would just take the loss on the old games, and adjust the price on future games.

 

[KiraFA37]

So,how much the price increased?

For the regions affected alot.

In Brazil, Victoria II went from R$35 to R$53. In Russia, it went from ₽350 to ₽700. In India, ₹565 to ₹805.

Victoria 2 is 7 years old and isn't being supported anymore by patches or DLC.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I really lost interest in their games because of the DLC model. It's simply too expensive to maintain the latest version, and the changes are often trivial anyway. Definitely well over-priced for what they are, and that was prior to these changes as well.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

I've said this before in previous outrage/scandals threads; Changing reviews in large numbers is an incredible interesting way for people to voice their opinion. Steam reviews matter in ways that are more significant than we had 5-10 years ago, when usually what would make news was if 4chan had flooded metacritic Dragon Age 2 reviews.


I don't think you see this sort of mobility in riling up so many community users so fast in other entertainment industries. You don't see this pattern on tv.com, imdb, metacritic, rottoentomatos. This is a uniquely Steam thing, and it's really weird to absorb.

It also seems to be effective some of the time. The Skyrim paid-mod debacle is one, and we will have to see if the GTA5 controversy will have any effect.

I'd like to see some hard data on and if there are correlation between publishers and developers sales hurting from bad user reviews from political outlet.

Hitman and Evolve are games that come to mind where many users adviced everyone to stay the fuck away. The former redeemed itself, while the latter was just too far gone, even when they tried to re-release it.

But sometimes I also get the impression that bad user reviews don't effect publisher behavior. SEGAs DLC strategy for the Total War games strike me as an obvious example. No matter how many negative reviews many of the total war DLCs have, it seems like they won't change their behavior.

And you have to wonder, if user review political outrage like this is always a nice thing, when Paradox didn't do this out of monetary greed.
It doesn't seem unfair to say that the steam community don't jump the gun too quickly some of the time.

On the other hand, I do find it empowering that there is this sort of mobility. We're now seeing thousands of reviews being updated less than 24 hours after the fact. It has to mean that a significant amount of users are really engaging with the community, regular updates and policies for games they play.
It gives more ethos to the idea that once the game is released, gamers have a say in how the game is updated, or they will try to fuck shit up, like with the pre-release of Xbox One or games like Evolved, Archeage and others with bad business practices.

This also proves useful and worthwhile when you have DOA games like FFXIV and ESO that come back from the dead, and the community gives them a second chance and update negative reviews into positive.
So we know it's a two way street that also turns sour reviews into positive ones.

 

[Stumpokapow]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

It is a little weird to do them retroactively; typically you set a fixed price in each currency at the time of release and update as new products release. But for Paradox I guess a lot of their income is passive catalogue income so they felt the need to do it retroactively.

 

[Jedi2016]

I would question the decision to raise prices on existing games.. seems it would be less of a problem if they simply adjusted prices of new games moving forward. Also depends on how much the prices are changing.

In any event, I fail to see the logic of leaving bad reviews of a game because of this. That's just petty and childish.

 

[Gbraga]

Prices tend to go down, the older they get, not up.

Victoria II released in 2010, Crusader Kings II in 2012, and Europa Universalis IV in 2013.

I would just take the loss on the old games, and adjust the price on future games.

There's also that. Namco increased their prices for new releases, but old games are still as cheap as ever.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

For games released as far back as 2010 though?

This is bullshit to be honest.

 

[Red Arremer]

It seems really silly to hike up prices for games that are 4+ years old. They already are making mad bank on their massive amounts of DLC expansions that all cost 10-20 $, and while several features of the patch coming along with those expansions are free, a lot of them are gated away behind the DLC.
And that's only considering actual content and not the cosmetic DLC like additional models, character portraits, etc.

Keep in mind that for EU4 alone, there's about a dozen content expansions all of which cost at least 10$, and they release a new one every ~6 months.

 

[Lanrutcon]

"Purchasing Power"

Christ, someone call my government. Paradox obviously knows something they don't.

Get fucked, Paradox.

 

[Roarer]

Purchasing power isn't something intangible that Paradox made up to justify their price hike. It's a common term in economics and is dependent on general income, cost of housing, taxes, cost of goods, employment rates etc. Heavily taxed nations with low interest rates and large unemployment have low purchasing power for example.

Games have been extremely inflation resistent historically, and a lot of non-AAA games are probably way underpriced. It would be great if things could stay cheap forever, but I just don't think it's realistic.

 

[Stiler]

Umm, why wouldn't they adjust prices going FORWARD rather then back?: Like release new games with a price adjustment to where they think it fits within that market but leave the old games where the price is?

Seems like a really bad idea, Imagine if video games went up rather then down as they got older, a lot of people would HATE that, not sure why they think it wouldn't get them a lot of bad press doing this.

Imagine Chevy releasing a brand new vehicle at 29,000 and then 5 years later they sell that model and year for 35k....that's NOT how the market works, as things get older they usually go down in value, not up, aside from rarity things (which digital games are not).

 

[Thraktor]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

Yeah, and it's hardly as if these are unsupported games. EU4 had a patch a few days ago that has almost 300 lines of patch notes (even excluding features related to the new DLC), and that's after patches in May with over 250 lines and almost 600 lines of patch notes respectively. I would understand the complaint if these were old, unsupported games, but we can't necessarily expect Paradox to continue charging people based on 2013 exchange rates for a game still being developed in 2017.

In any case, I can't see why anyone would buy any of these for full price more than a couple of months after they've come out. They're constantly on sale, and right now they all have fairly substantial discounts on Paradox's own website.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

currency adjustments to prices are not anything odd or weird

If it was just their new games that factor in the currency adjustments that wouldn't be a problem, but to go back and suddenly make their older games more expensive (and in some countries it's a significant amount) just seems a bit scummy.

 

[Vinter]

Umm, why wouldn't they adjust prices going FORWARD rather then back?: Like release new games with a price adjustment to where they think it fits within that market but leave the old games where the price is?

Seems like a really bad idea, Imagine if video games went up rather then down as they got older, a lot of people would HATE that, not sure why they think it wouldn't get them a lot of bad press doing this.

Imagine Chevy releasing a brand new vehicle at 29,000 and then 5 years later they sell that model and year for 35k....that's NOT how the market works, as things get older they usually go down in value, not up, aside from rarity things (which digital games are not).

They have a different model though. They aren't planning on releasing new games after a set number of years. They continue to work on their existing games and releasing dlc content instead. That way they can continue to work on making the games better. At least that is what I got from a press conference they did on the EU series. Victoria 2 doesn't get any new content though, so I guess that is kind of fucked.

 

[Kyougar]

I love paradox to death but this is bullshit.

Set the new games and dlc to the new price but stay your hands off of the old releases.

 

[spindoctor]

Yeah, and it's hardly as if these are unsupported games. EU4 had a patch a few days ago that has almost 300 lines of patch notes (even excluding features related to the new DLC), and that's after patches in May with over 250 lines and almost 600 lines of patch notes respectively. I would understand the complaint if these were old, unsupported games, but we can't necessarily expect Paradox to continue charging people based on 2013 exchange rates for a game still being developed in 2017.

Firstly, old and unsupported games also got a price hike. This happened across the board with their catalog. The price of EU4 and CK2 almost doubled in my region. I'm not sure why they think the purchasing power of my country doubled overnight (or even over the course of the last two years for that matter). And all these patches they work on are supported by DLC sales. EU4 has over 40 DLCs. CK2 has over 60 DLCs. Think about that for a second. It's a crazy number of extra bits of content. The price of the DLCs has gone up too.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Yeah, and it's hardly as if these are unsupported games. EU4 had a patch a few days ago that has almost 300 lines of patch notes (even excluding features related to the new DLC), and that's after patches in May with over 250 lines and almost 600 lines of patch notes respectively. I would understand the complaint if these were old, unsupported games, but we can't necessarily expect Paradox to continue charging people based on 2013 exchange rates for a game still being developed in 2017.

In any case, I can't see why anyone would buy any of these for full price more than a couple of months after they've come out. They're constantly on sale, and right now they all have fairly substantial discounts on Paradox's own website.

Victoria II is most definitely an unsupported game.

Paradox's patches may be accompanied by a fair amount of notes, but they usually pale in comparison to what their own modding scene offers, and in terms of the gameplay change/price ratio rarely seem like a fair ask. Not to mention I think they actually are oversupported - the constant tinkering with very small changes disrupts the modding scene by forcing everyone to focus on compatability rather than developing new content.

Saying 'these games go on sale regularly' is not a fair defense. If there is no reason to ever purchase a game except at the sale price and this happens on a regular occasion, why would you not just make the sale price the standard price? What benefit is it to the consumer making them wait another month for the next opportunity to buy to come around?

 

[xrnzaaas]

Lol they're doing that to their older games? Not to new releases only?

 

[jon bones]

arent part of these games about global economics and how it might alter the price of goods?

 

[Red Arremer]

Yeah, and it's hardly as if these are unsupported games. EU4 had a patch a few days ago that has almost 300 lines of patch notes (even excluding features related to the new DLC), and that's after patches in May with over 250 lines and almost 600 lines of patch notes respectively. I would understand the complaint if these were old, unsupported games, but we can't necessarily expect Paradox to continue charging people based on 2013 exchange rates for a game still being developed in 2017.

In any case, I can't see why anyone would buy any of these for full price more than a couple of months after they've come out. They're constantly on sale, and right now they all have fairly substantial discounts on Paradox's own website.

Sure, they are still supporting their games, and they make changes to the base game, but the vast majority of important features are gated behind DLC.
For instance in EU4, 2 of the most significant mechanics - estates and province development - are DLC only. A lot of diplomatic options are as well.
That's not even counting the revenue from cosmetic DLCs.

And if they really wanted to adjust for purchasing power, why do it for the base game and their old DLCs, and not just have the new DLCs be adjusted?
Every friend I recommend EU4 to is already super turned off by just the insane amount of DLC expansions, the fact they're even more expensive now doesn't help increase their player base by any stretch of the imagination. If anything, it will get people to stop buying any future expansions, or at least reduce their purchases.

I love EU4 but I have stopped purchasing the DLC expansions for the last few patches now simply because I can't afford dropping 15 or 20 € on an expansion every few months while also trying to buy other games/content.

 

[Stiler]

They have a different model though. They aren't planning on releasing new games after a set number of years. They continue to work on their existing games and releasing dlc content instead. That way they can continue to work on making the games better. At least that is what I got from a press conference they did on the EU series. Victoria 2 doesn't get any new content though, so I guess that is kind of fucked.

They charge for the dlc though...

 

[Superkewl]

Have had my eye on CKII and EUIV for years, but never pulled the trigger. Always thought I'll get them down the road sometime during a sale, but guess not anymore :-(

 

[chrominance]

I can't find a comprehensive source for all the price increases (I have to check on a game-by-game basis) but, for example, Stellaris went from $43.99 to $51.99 in Canada. This is a game that came out LAST YEAR and should not require a currency exchange adjustment of that magnitude. Across the board, it looks like the increases are roughly 15-20% in Canada.

This isn't great, but it's especially not great coming so soon before the Steam summer sale.

 

[Vinter]

They charge for the dlc though...

Yes they do. That is how they can continue to support the games. I understand that some people dislike this business model but they wouldn't make a lot of money otherwise. Their games aren't something that has a huge market.

 

[okita]

Steam summer sale usually appears around this time of the year, is it a strategic move to make people think they have a good discount while they don't? Better keep my eyes open. lol

 

[watershed]

Even if they are able to justify it from a business perspective, I'd never buy a game that went up in price from release. More typically, I'd expect prices to go down over time or atay steady.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

3,500 hours played

not recommended

 

[Arkkoran]

Not surprised, especially with HoI where focus trees are behind DLC when modders do as just a good a job, if not better.

 

[QuixoticNeutral]

Anyone tracking how these price hikes compare to the Big Mac Index?

 

[Eila]

Their loss really, choosing to not keep prices competitive like many AAA developers do will just lead potential costumers back to piracy or to flat out ignore the titles.

 

[MartyStu]

On one hand, I am thrilled that Paradox is being called on their bullshit.

On the other...yeah, those poor devs don't deserve this.

 

[scitek]

I see in some cases prices doubled. That seems excessive to me.

 

[Red Arremer]

Yes they do. That is how they can continue to support the games. I understand that some people dislike this business model but they wouldn't make a lot of money otherwise. Their games aren't something that has a huge market.

They have been increasing the size of their company and the value of their stocks for years now, all without adjusting for purchasing power.
So no, Paradox is far from being a poor indie developer who can barely scrape by. They're an extremely successful second tier publisher and development studio.

I also would argue that their titles' DLC is vastly overpriced for what it offers. Most people were fine with the pricing of the DLC because the expansion often came with very big patches, and the community knows that the titles are niche and continuing to support their games is pricy. That's why a lot of the players took the bullet and bought the overpriced expansions.

But why hike the prices up retroactively?
This seems partially to be done solely to squeeze out a few more bucks from the people who wait for sales on Paradox games to get the DLCs at a reduced price, but do you really believe that the people who weren't able to afford the DLC at base price before the change are going to now buy the DLC on sale if the prices are adjusted upwards?

 

[Eila]

They have been increasing the size of their company and the value of their stocks for years now, all without adjusting for purchasing power.
So no, Paradox is far from being a poor indie developer who can barely scrape by. They're an extremely successful second tier publisher and development studio.

I also would argue that their titles' DLC is vastly overpriced for what it offers. Most people were fine with the pricing of the DLC because the expansion often came with very big patches, and the community knows that the titles are niche and continuing to support their games is pricy. That's why a lot of the players took the bullet and bought the overpriced expansions.

But why hike the prices up retroactively?
This seems partially to be done solely to squeeze out a few more bucks from the people who wait for sales on Paradox games to get the DLCs at a reduced price, but do you really believe that the people who weren't afford the DLC at base price before the change are going to now buy the DLC on sale if the prices are adjusted upwards?

Lol, poor indie develpers are really the only ones that keep the price guidelines. It's AAA publishers at large who choose to not follow the price guidelines valve set anymore.

 

[Adnor]

People are getting mad at the prices most developers are using for third world countries, and while Paradox's prices aren't as bad, the fact they upped them just makes people angrier.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I always find these reactions so sad. So you didn't agree with a decision made by a publisher, it does not make the game any worse, so why all the bad reviews. Don't buy the game if you don't think it isn't worth the money. These are entertainment products and there is plenty of choice.

I see people giving bad reviews that have put literally thousands of hours into the game. And you are telling me a small price increase suddenly makes the game not worth the money? Get over it.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

I always find these reactions so sad. So you didn't agree with a decision made by a publisher, it does not make the game any worse, so why all the bad reviews. Don't buy the game if you don't think it isn't worth the money. These are entertainment products and there is plenty of choice.

I see people giving bad reviews that have put literally thousands of hours into the game. And you are telling me a small price increase suddenly makes the game not worth the money? Get over it.

Game reviews seem to be the only way to respond negatively to a publisher/developer decision in a way that they hear you.

It may not be the correct channel, but I'm glad there's an effective one at all.

 

[Jackpot]

The reason for this is to make our prices match the purchasing power of those areas, as well as create a more equal price point for our products across the globe.

If this is true then why have prices only increased? Shouldn't they decrease for poorer areas? Are they claiming they've been using the lowest price point up until now?

 

[Adnor]

I always find these reactions so sad. So you didn't agree with a decision made by a publisher, it does not make the game any worse, so why all the bad reviews. Don't buy the game if you don't think it isn't worth the money. These are entertainment products and there is plenty of choice.

I see people giving bad reviews that have put literally thousands of hours into the game. And you are telling me a small price increase suddenly makes the game not worth the money? Get over it.

It's one of the few ways consumers have to actually be heard. It worked for Arkham Knight, it may work for nonsensical price hikes in third world countries.

 

[Mavromatis]

I always find these reactions so sad. So you didn't agree with a decision made by a publisher, it does not make the game any worse, so why all the bad reviews. Don't buy the game if you don't think it isn't worth the money. These are entertainment products and there is plenty of choice.

I see people giving bad reviews that have put literally thousands of hours into the game. And you are telling me a small price increase suddenly makes the game not worth the money? Get over it.

I think the review should include the price as a factor too. A good game with a too high price can easily get a lower rating since the price change the expectations. That's why cheaper games can get better reviews, they are good enough to meet the expectation of that price point.

If this is true then why have prices only increased? Shouldn't they decrease for poorer areas? Are they claiming they've been using the lowest price point up until now?

United Kingdom got an increased price while the economy isn't any good over there and the price nearly doubled in India and I really doubt that there has been an economical miracle that we all missed but Paradox noticed.

 

[Vinter]

They have been increasing the size of their company and the value of their stocks for years now, all without adjusting for purchasing power.
So no, Paradox is far from being a poor indie developer who can barely scrape by. They're an extremely successful second tier publisher and development studio.

I also would argue that their titles' DLC is vastly overpriced for what it offers. Most people were fine with the pricing of the DLC because the expansion often came with very big patches, and the community knows that the titles are niche and continuing to support their games is pricy. That's why a lot of the players took the bullet and bought the overpriced expansions.

But why hike the prices up retroactively?
This seems partially to be done solely to squeeze out a few more bucks from the people who wait for sales on Paradox games to get the DLCs at a reduced price, but do you really believe that the people who weren't able to afford the DLC at base price before the change are going to now buy the DLC on sale if the prices are adjusted upwards?

I agree that it is pricey and I understand that people are upset with the pricebump. As i mentioned in an earlier post I read that some countries like Brazil and Russia especially got hit hard. I am not defending every business decision Paradox makes by all means. I just wanted to point out that Paradox has a different business model than a lot of other developers.