I was really surprised that CA is so attached to the price. They would rather postpone the DLC and add more content to it than make it cheaper? They could have reduced the not yet announced price for ToD. Then add more content to SoC and leave it as the black sheep of the family. 

But they want so much to charge 25€ for the DLC that they delay it (which costs them money) and add more content to this DLC(which costs them money) AND add content to an already sold DLC afterward (which costs them money) only to justify 25 € (or $) for Thrones of Decay and all coming Lord Packs?

What do you think the number 25 is all about (or 20 if you pay in £)?

Nothing wrong with that. If they want to make £20 DLCs that is fine. It might price a few people out but that is their retail strategy.

Delivering a product that matches that price (in quality and content) is essential for me to buy it though. I know Fingolfin was apparently happy to buy 16,000 copies of SoC at that price point but unfortunately I felt that the content and quality failed to justify this price and did not buy one. If I felt that the price was justified on SoC I almost certainly would have coughed up.

Personally I don't think CA can offer content for £20 that will get me to spend the money.  Chaos Dwarfs didn't seem worth the price to me, and the community generally agreed saying it was expensive but good.  SoC would need a lot to get to Chorf level content, and even then it's a no from me.

I'm hoping long term the £20 price point model flops and they revert back to the much more popular WH2 model.

Because most people never had a problem with the price itself, but the content to price ratio, we are more than willing to pay for a 25€ DLC if It has 25€ worth of content in it.

By contrast Pharaoh was a good SAGA game marketed and sold as a full fleshed main game, it wasn't a matter of adding more to Pharaoh, but that it simply wasn't what CA was trying to make us believe it was.

lordchance2#1568 wrote:

Personal guess is that the profit margin on DLC is quite obscene at current price compared to full price games the effort is ridiculously low. They are just trying to find the right mix of content to make minimal effort required to sell to most people at that price point currently. Their analysis was probably that they had under estimated the amount of content needed for the price and that it needs to be increased slightly to catch a similiar crowd to wh2 lord packs and hence make 2.5 times the money. If anything I'd say they are probably doing the prepwork for a Dogs of War race pack around 2025 that will cost 35-45 euro.

In part they are right since the price doesn't bother me in the least I just expect a bit more content and fixes for that price.

The £20/$25 was explained as essentially future-proofing. A price point that could see out the remainder of the game. After this most recent controversy & their response, I don't see them increasing the price to 35-45, as they know it'll just set off a new round of nuclear explosions in the community.

The $25 pricing still seems too high to me, and even though CA has announced that they're going to add some new content to SoC (even if it's double the original content), I still don't think the amount of content will justify that kind of pricing. Unless the quantity and quality of DLC content can reach at least 60% of 《Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty》's level.)

Obviously, CA's current technology and production capacity, WH3's outdated codebase, and old game engine can't support such DLC, and WH3 's player base isn't big enough to spread the cost of a dlc of this magnitude.

yanghaohit#5017 wrote:

The $25 pricing still seems too high to me, and even though CA has announced that they're going to add some new content to SoC (even if it's double the original content), I still don't think the amount of content will justify that kind of pricing. Unless the quantity and quality of DLC content can reach at least 60% of 《Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty》's level.)

Obviously, CA's current technology and production capacity, WH3's outdated codebase, and old game engine can't support such DLC, and WH3 's player base isn't big enough to spread the cost of a dlc of this magnitude.

That seems like an impossible benchmark to achieve - and is not comparing like for like.

Value is subjective, but that's why sales exist. Steam is where the cost is highest, but is also where CA has the biggest cut taken from it. It's no surprise the price is cheaper at other approved retailers, like Fanatical etc, as it is less financially punitive to CA.

I'm personally fine with spending £20 every 4 months on DLC packs, if they are chunky/meaty additions to the game. 

I just got my Steam review... 

I didn't buy SoC, as I considered the price/value was not satisfactory, and wanted to wait for a sales. First time I've done that for Warhammer, I usually get the DLC immediately, even if I don't play it much, but I have all my mods to update. Look at the number of sessions played...

This time I was ready to wait before updating Kislev and Cathay, and focus on adding the High Elves... but since someone gifted me the DLC as support for modding effort, I updated these two races sooner.

It's not a question of price, I could easily afford it if I wish, but a question of fair price vs content. But when I got the gift, then I had a kind of moral obligation toward the guy who supported the mod to update it.

Steph#6413 wrote:

I just got my Steam review... 

I didn't buy SoC, as I considered the price/value was not satisfactory, and wanted to wait for a sales. First time I've done that for Warhammer, I usually get the DLC immediately, even if I don't play it much, but I have all my mods to update. Look at the number of sessions played...

This time I was ready to wait before updating Kislev and Cathay, and focus on adding the High Elves... but since someone gifted me the DLC as support for modding effort, I updated these two races sooner.

It's not a question of price, I could easily afford it if I wish, but a question of fair price vs content. But when I got the gift, then I had a kind of moral obligation toward the guy who supported the mod to update it.

Well said. I honestly think there was an element of CA looking at GW's pricing model & how Warhammer fans are content to throw money at that, and the execs were steered in that direction as a result. Warhammer fans don't have any issue throwing significant money at the hobby, so long as they think it's worth it.

lordchance2#1568 wrote:

Mr-Vorn#1203 wrote:

lordchance2#1568 wrote:

Personal guess is that the profit margin on DLC is quite obscene at current price compared to full price games the effort is ridiculously low. They are just trying to find the right mix of content to make minimal effort required to sell to most people at that price point currently. Their analysis was probably that they had under estimated the amount of content needed for the price and that it needs to be increased slightly to catch a similiar crowd to wh2 lord packs and hence make 2.5 times the money. If anything I'd say they are probably doing the prepwork for a Dogs of War race pack around 2025 that will cost 35-45 euro.

In part they are right since the price doesn't bother me in the least I just expect a bit more content and fixes for that price.

The £20/$25 was explained as essentially future-proofing. A price point that could see out the remainder of the game. After this most recent controversy & their response, I don't see them increasing the price to 35-45, as they know it'll just set off a new round of nuclear explosions in the community.

How cute expecting a race pack which probably takes about twice the work of a lord pack to have the same price :) The next one will be more expensive than Chaos Dwarfs where for sure.

My advice would be not to froth with rage at a hypothetical that may never come to pass. In the event it does, you'll find me similarly aggrieved, but it's a poor excuse for cynicism at this early stage.

If they increase the content (as they're planning to do) by a significant amount - granted we don't know the full extent yet - then you're looking at 3 separate races with 3 separate mechanics and a large amount of units. It may not stack up to the full extent of a race pack, but let's not pretend that in that context the race pack is somehow more complex/expansive, because it wouldn't be.

Mr-Vorn#1203 wrote:
Warhammer fans don't have any issue throwing significant money at the hobby, so long as they think it's worth it.

The significant money is the main reason I dropped off TT WH in the first, and why I got into TWWH.

To me it's entirely a price point issue. I would never buy a DLC at full price for 25€/$. 10-15€/$ at full price sure. 20€/$ for a full race or major DLC but preferably then discounted.  

ah 25€/$ i would never consider  it unless it's at least 30% off. 

I've gotten all WH2 DLC's at launch for full price or 10% of so far (including CD to be honest, but that was borderline even for a full race pack). But for the SoC and the ToD and coming once I really feel I need to wait for the first major sale with 25-30% off to even consider them.

Regardless of how much content CA manages to stuff in them really.

Aic#3164 wrote:

To me it's entirely a price point issue. I would never buy a DLC at full price for 25€/$. 10-15€/$ at full price sure. 20€/$ for a full race or major DLC but preferably then discounted.  

ah 25€/$ i would never consider  it unless it's at least 30% off. 

I've gotten all WH2 DLC's at launch for full price or 10% of so far (including CD to be honest, but that was borderline even for a full race pack). But for the SoC and the ToD and coming once I really feel I need to wait for the first major sale with 25-30% off to even consider them.

Regardless of how much content CA manages to stuff in them really.

Which is perfectly legitimate, and no doubt a reason CA has factored in the new price point, because they know there's a significant chunk of people that will wait for sales. Sales on £20/$25 DLC's is going to net them far more in the long-run than if they'd just reduced the price. I can see why they're doing it.

I never minded big expensive expansions to the game

I mind a huge increase in price without increasing the amount of content tho

Next year when i get my new pc i wont bat an eye spending big on a load of DLC for the game

That said i wont be price gouged, if they don't provide a big chunk of more content to the Nurgle DLC compared to the last one at the same price point im just done buying DLC's for the game(unless it's a new race, i feel like Dawi Zharr were good value for money)

The price is fine, I just need to feel like I'm getting good value from it. 

I don't buy games full price anymore, but I'd happily pay this price for a good DLC. 

Schub#9514 wrote:

I was really surprised that CA is so attached to the price. They would rather postpone the DLC and add more content to it than make it cheaper? They could have reduced the not yet announced price for ToD. Then add more content to SoC and leave it as the black sheep of the family. 

But they want so much to charge 25€ for the DLC that they delay it (which costs them money) and add more content to this DLC(which costs them money) AND add content to an already sold DLC afterward (which costs them money) only to justify 25 € (or $) for Thrones of Decay and all coming Lord Packs?

What do you think the number 25 is all about (or 20 if you pay in £)?

I didn't  buy SoC because it's a matter of principle for me. I will boy it when it's 50% off and they add more content. If ToD has the amount and quality of content to justify the price I'll buy it gladly. CA needs to understand that people want good content. If they deliver, people will give them money.