Sequels versus DLC: when games start competing against themselves

[Ixion]

I have noticed this earlier with Crusader Kings, and now again with Warhammer. When i ask friends and some 'cords about whether they're gonna get a sequel or wanna stick to a DLCed predecessor the answer seems to lean towards the latter increasingly often. Both of these series are notorious with their DLC-heavy approach to maintaining their games.

Reasons for sticking with the old ones like WH2 seem to be:

• Sunk costs, i might be biased in this as i'm definitely not rich. A new army like WH2's Nehekara is 12.99 bucks, and optional characters like Ikit Claw are 9 dollarinos, WH3 does not have any of these armies or characters yet.
• Polish, WH2 is not without flaws but it's easy to see that a lot of effort has been made to both squash bugs, and update old rosters to be on par with the newer armies and provide a good challenge for them. WH3 is still in the process of setting, balance issues like the Amazing Unstoppable Khorne rapetrain, and Nurgle being nearly unplayably bad are still in play. Also the campaign is not well received.
• "I'm not finished eating yet!" CK2 and WH2 with all the DLCs have a.. ton... of viable gaming time by themselves and even if you want some variety there are..
• Mods, Older games have more mods, not every one of these will get a forward port and even still it will need time in order to be as polished as it's older ones.

I would like to pick this forum's brains on the matter, do you prefer the bleeding edge game, or the older "definitive experience"?

 

[Dreamlord]

I think there is a big difference between games like CK or WH, with so much DLC and updates, to say Dying Light 2.

I almost never buy DLCs and I rarely if ever replay games, so new games for me.

 

[GreyHorace]

Depends on what I want. If I want an expansion on a game I've enjoyed, I choose DLC.

I'll only buy a sequel if it's an entirely new game with improvements upon the original. If it's just a glorified expansion then I'll pass.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

Well, every new numbered sequel starts from scratch with a limited # of factions / fighters / whatever, and the DLC train begins again. And the gameplay systems change, so there's yet another early learning curve to overcome. Sometimes people like sticking with a game they're above-avg/ elite skilled at instead of leaping directly to the newest game where they'll have to re-learn a lot of the game nuances.

I think it's a sign of good health that videogames can have small pieces of DLC, expansion packs, and full blown sequels. Yep, plenty of examples of how companies try to squeeze more $$ out of their customers but this is an entertainment hobby. It's always gonna be profit-driven to some degree.

 

[Kadayi]

I got into CK2 early on and I quite enjoyed the slow trickle out of DLC over the years as it brought more game-play and dimension to things, which always, in turn, brought me back to it for a period when a new one was released. However, I was very impressed with the fundamental changes introduced with CK3 and albeit it didn't quite have the scope of a fully DLC'd CK2, at launch, I still found I much preferred it versus returning to CK2 as it was designed from the ground up to embrace the more Role-Play nature of what the series has become, whereas with CK2 that was kind of something that emerged from the later DLC.

Plus also CK3 is fundamentally a more accessible title in terms of UI and the transparency of the systems (coming to consoles soon btw) whereas CK2, a lot of stuff was really hidden away and even a few hundred hours in I would be 'wait what?' 'New information has come to light man!!'. I wouldn't say CK3 is dumped down though, it just does a far better job of keeping you the player informed as to all of your options during play versus CK2.

 

[gameragodzilla]

Given every game is a live service these days, what usually ends up happening is the old game got a constant trickle of DLC to add new content, and then the brand new game will come out completely bare bones and probably also pretty buggy.

So really, the best time to buy a game is when its sequel comes out, as by then it'll have all the content and patches to be a fully complete product. And you'll probably also get it with a discount, too. Then you wait for the sequel to get its live service DLC out of the way, and then buy it when the next game comes out.

 

[Soodanim]

Although some sequels improve on the engine, QoL features, and more, some sequels get rid of things that were good from their predecessor.

It really is a case by case thing.

There's always the third option, aka "The Hitman Method": import the previous game into the sequel

 

[Bolivar]

I'm a sucker for the shiny new thing and day one game releases help break up the monotony of life. Also, playing a brand new strategy game at launch and figuring out all the systems no one knows anything about yet is awesome.

There is a legit debate in the CK community about the two games but I strongly feel CK3 does a lot of things I can't go back from. I originally thought it was a prettier evolution but overtime I came to appreciate how the 3D animated characters, the new systems and the overhauls are such game changers and bring the series a lot closer to the ideal of a story-driven dynasty simulator.

Warhammer 3 is tough because it's a new set of campaigns and factions and it's not like you can play any of it in the older ones. These games are basically DLC for each other but you only get the full experience in the latest game. You will get to use everything you bought for the first two in Warhammer 3 relatively soon but you will never play the eight new races in the older games. That said, I sense there's a lot of pressure on Creative Assembly to get the combined map right. The entire trilogy has been building up to this and people have a lot literally invested in it being a satisfying payoff.

 

[Poppabk]

I still play games that are well over a decade old, so new and shiny is irrelevant to me. Nowadays multiplayer games have usually finally gotten balanced and patched by the time the sequel rolls out so the rush to beta test the new version seems strange to me.