Harebrained Schemes and Paradox Interactive to split

This is so sad. I absolutely loved the Shadowrun games. I hope that somehow, some way, at some time, the veterans behind those games get together and do another in that universe.

Funny enough, it was Paradox's predatory scam dlc behavior that prevented me from purchasing Lamplighter. So maybe HBS can pick up and move to a better home!

Why? There's only a digital artbook and soundtrack available as DLC.
...

And a separate character in the nocturne dlc. A single one.


Last edited by emphy on 18 October 2023 at 6:47 am UTC

Funny enough, it was Paradox's predatory scam dlc behavior

What what? Predatory how? A scam??

Paradox are one of the few publisher's with a well established, regular, value add DLC regime. They support their games YEARS after release. Stellaris, for example, released over 7 years ago, but some of the DLC modules released are just £9 yet add swathes of content.

I wish other publishers would take note instead of trying monetise micro-transactions.

I'll take properly thought out DLC any day over cosmetic shite, Battle passes and "Seasons".

Depends on the game. Remember their flagship, GalCiv? They are constantly remaking the same game, but releasing the next iteration with a skeleton of the features of the previous game and then releasing DLC after DLC to catch up feature wise with the last game. Don't pretend that it's not to earn more money.

That sounds like you're talking about Stardock, not Paradox.

I wouldn't exactly praise Paradox dlc, though. The most recent one for EU4 was a rework of a bunch of stuff from previous dlcs (so you're paying at least twice here), and 30 minutes of music tied into preorder-exclusive dlc for this dlc (yes, dlc for dlc). I'd rather have them work on EU4 for a good long time rather than release EU4-8 in that same timespan, sure, but there are issues with their business model (hard not to notice when they've gone public as a company, for one thing).

Funny enough, it was Paradox's predatory scam dlc behavior

What what? Predatory how? A scam??

Paradox are one of the few publisher's with a well established, regular, value add DLC regime. They support their games YEARS after release. Stellaris, for example, released over 7 years ago, but some of the DLC modules released are just £9 yet add swathes of content.

I wish other publishers would take note instead of trying monetise micro-transactions.

I'll take properly thought out DLC any day over cosmetic shite, Battle passes and "Seasons".

Depends on the game. Remember their flagship, GalCiv? They are constantly remaking the same game, but releasing the next iteration with a skeleton of the features of the previous game and then releasing DLC after DLC to catch up feature wise with the last game. Don't pretend that it's not to earn more money.

That sounds like you're talking about Stardock, not Paradox.

I wouldn't exactly praise Paradox dlc, though. The most recent one for EU4 was a rework of a bunch of stuff from previous dlcs (so you're paying at least twice here), and 30 minutes of music tied into preorder-exclusive dlc for this dlc (yes, dlc for dlc). I'd rather have them work on EU4 for a good long time rather than release EU4-8 in that same timespan, sure, but there are issues with their business model (hard not to notice when they've gone public as a company, for one thing).

You are right. My mistake. I thought Paradox was still publishing Stardock's GalCiv, like they did in the past. Apparently no? Anyway, it's all the same. Paradox also releases cash grab DLCs.

Here's a link to the steam page since I didn't see one on this page.

Interesting, I hadn't heard of this one. I may enjoy it, but I have so many more games to play first, including XCOM. Plus, the asking price of 50€ seems a bit steep.

Just when I discovered the Shadowrun games I'm in the middle of Dragonfall on my Deck and with Hong-Kong already installed, It's funny how sometimes great games pass before your eyes without noticing until someone brings it up in a conversation and recommend it to you. I hope they do more RPGs because they do it great.

Harebrained Schemes, I wish you the best.

Compare CK2 or Stellaris with games that have seen constant content updates without paid DLC (Project Zomboid, Valheim, Caves of Qud, NMS, ...), constant content updates with much more gamer-friendly DLC releases (eg, Deep Rock Galactic, Don't Starve, ...), or, dare I say it, even F2P games like Apex or PoE which see constant content updates without locking gameplay mechanics behind paywalls, and make their money off of cosmetics

So you prefer microtransactions then. That's fine, I don't. I prefer, as I said earlier, well thought out DLC expansions.

There are some exceptions, such as Hello Games NMS, who just do free content, somehow. It's been suggested that they only do all those free updates because of the shit-show of a launch they had, but I don't believe that, at least not any more. It's been years and they're still releasing content for free, riding on the sales of the base game. Impressive.

So there are exceptions, definitely. But normally after release if you want continuity you have to accept either DLC, or microtransactions. Paradox do DLC, which is increasingly rare these days. Deep Rock Galactic, Apex, PoE, Diablo, and most other do mtx. They're both viable, but I definitely have my preferences.

Calling Paradox a cash-grab publisher for doing DLC? Insultingly petty and wholly disingenuous.


Last edited by scaine on 18 October 2023 at 3:34 pm UTC

I also find their DLC system a turnoff. In CK2, for example, you just don't feel you're playing the full game unless you buy a bunch of DLC. Charging 5$/month or a 280$ for access to the full version of your game is a bit rich for a single-player game.

Christ dude - CK2 is over a decade old. It's AMAZING that you can still pick and chose how to play the game today. It's ridiculous to think you need to pay £110+ to buy ALL the dlc for this now-free game. Yes, it would be nice if they wrapped a couple of these older items into the base game. Yes, it would be nice if Steam made DLC clearer when there's overlap (many of the "expansion" DLC for CK2 are now in bundles called "collections", but with such an old game and so many expansions, good luck figuring it all out).

But it must still be selling, I suppose, despite the success of CK3.

Honestly, some of the replies in this thread are really odd. Publisher and Developers need to make money. These comments give me the impression that they resent them for doing so! We shouldn't resent people making a living by giving us entertainment, except in those cases of predatory practices designed to take advantage of vulnerable or susceptible people - e.g. lootboxes, or in Blizzard's case, auction-places for "desirable" high-end gear.

Goddam, I'm so glad I'm not in this industry.

Calling Paradox a cash-grab publisher for doing DLC? Insultingly petty and wholly disingenuous.

I don't entirely agree with you here. When I see something like Stellaris having a DLC list that totals 7 times the price of the game, I just don't believe that what they added is worth that much. It just seems that they abuse the DLC method to try and sell content for an inflated price. Which may not be the traditional cash-grab, but it's still related.

Yes, it would be nice if Steam made DLC clearer when there's overlap (many of the "expansion" DLC for CK2 are now in bundles called "collections", but with such an old game and so many expansions, good luck figuring it all out).

And this creates a problem. If figuring it out is made so difficult, it's just easier to let it go. When I see DLC lists with hundreds of euros of stuff, I just move on to something that doesn't require a degree to figure out.

This is so sad. I absolutely loved the Shadowrun games. I hope that somehow, some way, at some time, the veterans behind those games get together and do another in that universe.

Funny enough, it was Paradox's predatory scam dlc behavior that prevented me from purchasing Lamplighter. So maybe HBS can pick up and move to a better home!

Why? There's only a digital artbook and soundtrack available as DLC. Not very scammy IMHO.

Sorry, but nope: day 1 dlc included a $8 in-game character. Which of course means it was developed as part of the game pre-release and then they chopped it out and tried charging extra for it on day 1. That's predatory, and a blatant scam.

I was about to hit that purchase button on the game, but then when I saw that, I instantly canceled it. If you check the steam forums, there's thread after thread about this exact topic. They lost a lot of customers over that decision.

I don't mind at all having deluxe editions with artbooks and soundtracks, in fact I encourage it, gets a little extra money for the devs for cool stuff. But none of that impacts the game itself whatsoever.

I don't entirely agree with you here. When I see something like Stellaris having a DLC list that totals 7 times the price of the game, I just don't believe that what they added is worth that much. It just seems that they abuse the DLC method to try and sell content for an inflated price. Which may not be the traditional cash-grab, but it's still related.

They price the base game, which is the entry point, relatively low so that:
1) upfront cost to get started isn't too high, you don't need to put a lot of money before you even know if you'll like it.
2) most of the cost is optional, only the most hardcore completionists will pay the full cost, most people will pay a lot less. I am a super fan of the game but even so I don't have all the stuff.
3) more casual players can get great cost-benefit with the base game (which improves constantly with free updates), while people that really love the game can pay for content that for them is worth a lot because they put hundreds or thousands of hours into the game.

As for "inflated price", for any game DLC has a higher margin than the base game - meaning the same amount of "content" or "work" sells for a higher price. It is unavoidable, because by definition it will only sell a fraction of the copies of the base game, and naturally it won't re-make all the basics (that would be dumb, more work but not more value). The point is that for many people, improving the game they like is better than buying a new game they like less.

I think that big strategy games are a very natural fit for additional content, because you play many matches from start to end - so you don't have to replay the entire story or redo some puzzles, but it can still work together with stuff from the old game instead of being a separate story or something. Plus they benefit from complexity, are mostly singleplayer so no pay to win issues, they have a long learning curve and good replayability so you stick with the same game for quite a while...

Paradox keep adding DLC because they keep working on the game for years, and we can see it as it happens. It is not like they are holding content back (day-0 DLC) or making a game without enough content - their games are huge and they keep even reworking the basics. Not that their DLC is always good, much less worth its price... but they are upfront and honest about what they are doing, and it does not usually detract from the (cheap and excellent) base game. I'll take Paradox' DLC over microtransactions that make the game worse to try and manipulate me into paying.

Never liked Paradox Interactive due to their EULA and push to require connection to their servers for multiplayer games that traditionally had LAN or peer-to peer options, plus their DLC model - so maybe parting ways is not a bad thing here. Harebrained Schemes on the other hand has quite an interesting portfolio of diamond in the rough games with just the right amount of magic sauce - so best of wishes for their future endeavors wherever their road may take them!

Ah cr*p, does it mean they can't make any more Shadowrun games because Paradox still own the license?

Ah cr*p, does it mean they can't make any more Shadowrun games because Paradox still own the license?

That's unclear. Paradox own the three Shadowrun games ("Paradox will maintain ownership of The Lamplighters League, released this month, and other titles developed by HBS.") but the Shadowrun electronic IP is owned by Microsoft (other Shadowrun usage is possibly owned by Topps cards after they bought WizKids) and was licensed back to Jordan Weisman. Whether Paradox or Jordan Weisman now have that licence to make future games, and whether either could get a different licence to make future games, are unknown outside of those parties.

Sorry, but nope: day 1 dlc included a $8 in-game character. Which of course means it was developed as part of the game pre-release and then they chopped it out and tried charging extra for it on day 1. That's predatory, and a blatant scam.

This is interesting, as it made me realise that I don't think of Paradox as owning Lamplighter. While I've been defending the Paradox DLC model, I despise day 1 DLC and yep, I agree it's both undesirable and pretty predatory, not a great look at all. It's not a scam - dunno what you makes you think that? Where's the scam in this?

The only defence for Paradox here, I think, is that this isn't normal for them as far as I know. When I'm defending their DLC model, it's because it extends a favoured franchise long after the initial launch, and does so in ways that you can choose which expansion is the best fit for you.

I think of it like buying the D&D ruleset (the base game), then buying campaign modules afterwards (the DLC). I love this model, as it gives the customer freedom to tailor what they get out of their initial purchase. I think most of the criticism about it derives from the mindset that you HAVE TO BUY ALL THE DLC. MUST... BUY... IT ALL! Obviously, that's not realistic or feasible (unless you're rich and/or have hundreds of hours to spend in the same game). I suppose Paradox would love it if all their customers did, but given that they typically release around 3 expansions a year, that's extremely unlikely.

I guess I call it scam because you're paying full price for a game that is not complete.

This wasn't additional content developed later on and released because of fan popularity or extending the game etc...

If I pay full price for a brand new car, I expect to show up and be able to drive off. I don't expect that it'll only have 3 wheels and I will be extorted for a 4th wheel for extra money. (maybe the car dealership thing is a bad example here because theyre infamous for all kinds of scummy behavior lol - but you get my point!)

I guess I call it scam because you're paying full price for a game that is not complete.

This wasn't additional content developed later on and released because of fan popularity or extending the game etc...

If I pay full price for a brand new car, I expect to show up and be able to drive off. I don't expect that it'll only have 3 wheels and I will be extorted for a 4th wheel for extra money. (maybe the car dealership thing is a bad example here because theyre infamous for all kinds of scummy behavior lol - but you get my point!)

I get your point but don't agree with it. Your car analogy in this case is buying a car that doesn't have all the extras - you'll pay more for a heated steering wheel, alloys, etc. The word "scam" implies dishonesty, but there's nothing dishonest about paying for a better product. That's just capitalism.

I saw a couple of youtube videos about the game when it came out.
It looked interesting.
Went to buy it and found out it was Windows only.
Moved on and didn't look back.

So you won't play any non native games even if Proton works well? Sometimes the Windows versions running in Proton are better than native as the native ports tend to be abandoned and locked to old libraries.

So you won't play any non native games even if Proton works well? Sometimes the Windows versions running in Proton are better than native as the native ports tend to be abandoned and locked to old libraries.

I know there's some examples for this, but doing my personal experiment, I tried the ten first games I bought on Steam for Linux (in 2012/2013 if I remember correctly), and every single of them was running without any problem, without any tinkering. So, no, I don't think native ports tend to stop working. And old games tend to be abandoned by the developers on any system.


Last edited by Eike on 20 October 2023 at 8:00 am UTC

Sometimes the Windows versions running in Proton are better than native as the native ports tend to be abandoned and locked to old libraries.

Divinity: Original Sin always comes to mind, and there are quite a few other ones listed on the Arch wiki for anyone interested: Archwiki: Game-specific troubleshooting

There are also a couple of games that while they do have a native version, it just runs better for other reasons... And that is without mentioning those that gateway cross platform play, I'm looking at you Civ6!

Wow, it's almost as if people are not willing to dump $50 on a random game they never heard about. Ever heard of Laffer Curve?

I knew about the game at least. It was on my wish list for a good while. I think Steam suggested it to me...? I still want it and plan to get it, but I don't buy single-player games until I'm ready to play them. I'm excited to get it though. Poor marketing? I knew it was HBS at least, and that was a big draw. My thoughts went like this, "Oh, this looks neat. Made by HBS? I'm sold."