POLL: Expansion Packs: Rip Off or Goldmine?

Remove all ads!

I know we don't see polls in here much, but I wanted to see what everyone thought about expansion packs. I've been wondering lately if I'm a sucker for buying them. I've recently become a hopeless junky for Sid Meier's Civilization IV - excellent game. So enamored was I with this new found digital crack that I took Gnarff and Aldeth's advice and picked up the recently released expansion pack, within a week of buying the core game. Like most newly released expansion packs, it cost 60% of the original game (Civ IV new is $50, the expansion is $30). Yet the amount of content it adds (6 new civs, 10 more leaders which are little more than free techs, a new unique building for each civ, a Warlord unit and various patches) hardly justifies such a steep price. $10 is more appropriate. But then again, if there are suckers like me out there willing and ready to pay $30, why charge less?

This isn't the case for ALL expansions, mind you. The upcoming expansion to Star Wars: Empire at War will add an entirely new faction (bringing the total to 3) plus a slew of new units for both the Empire and the Rebellion. Thats over 35% new contect, which to me is worth it. Same with the expansion to Age of Mythology (which increased the civs from 3 to 4, and new units for everyone).

Here's something I've always wondered about expansions: why do so few expansions (particularly in the case of RPG's) add so little to the core game? It seems like they tack a bunch on the end, but give little attention to adding replay value to the core game? Imagine if, when Throne of Bhaal came out, Bioware added 2 new kits to every class, 2 new interactive NPC's to Athkatla, created a Barbarian and Monk stronghold, and replaced all the cut content (such as the Boo kidnapping quest)? All that, I think, would have been just as valuable as the Throne storyline addition. It wouldn't have been THAT much more work, yet would have enriched the original product immensely.

Anyway - enough about my opinion on this, vote and discuss already.

Note: Factor into your opinion whether or not you wait for the price to drop to $10 or less before buying an expansion, and whether or not you feel they're worth it even at that price. Otherwise, I think it's safe to say most people buy them at full price or close to that when they come out.

[ September 20, 2006, 17:32: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 28 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Expansion Packs: Rip Off or Goldmine? (28 votes.)

Expansion Packs: Rip Off or Goldmine? (Choose 1)
* Rip Off (they aren't worth it) - 43% (12)
* Goldmine (worth every penny) - 57% (16)
* I don't buy expansions. - 0% (0)

 

The thing about expansions is that they usually add a lot of content which becomes pretty much essential if you are into playing games competitively. For example, if you were playing Civ IV on a LAN with your buddies, all of them have the expansion and you dont...well, you can't really play can you?

Same thing with Warcraft 3...I only actually bought Frozen Throne because I played heaps of LAN games with my mates and when it came out, they were all using the standard versions with the expansion packs on Battle.net.

So, although I agree with you that the value for money of expansion packs is usually suspect...what can you do if in certain situations you require them to play? Overall, for the continued playability of certain games competitively, or for additional content/abilities that become standard in most games, I'd say expansions are worth it. HoTU being a case in point.

Of course, when it is non-essential, such as HOTU I'd rather wait till it was cheaper and then buy it. For instance, with NWN I purchased the Diamond Edition.

 

Most of the time I have found expansions to be well worth the money. However, that has been for games where I bought the expansion in order to get additional levels/areas. The Civ games use randomly generated maps so I can see why the expansion would be a bit subpar.

 

Goldmine here.

I'm cheap, especially with games. I usually wait for the price to drop to $20 or less.

It depends on the content, which you can't really tell until you play it. ToB I would not have paid full price for. Dungeon Siege: Legends of Aranna I did.

 

Goldmine, without expansions, NWN sucks.
BGs were alright without TotSC and ToB, though.

 

By my experience, expansions are rip-offs for the most part. Take the Sims 2 for example: 8 expansions, each adding next to nothing, and each costing almost as much as the original game. Simply not worth the cash.

On the other hand, there have been exceptions. Diablo 2 without LoD is a bit *too* basic for my comfort and the episodic content of Half Life 2 is pretty neat (even if so simply because the engine itself is so good). But in general, expansions are just a quick way to milk the old cow.

They could be good additions if they really developed the in-game mechanics to a new level and/or added something worthwhile, but guess this is too much for the devs...

 

Goldmine.

I paid almost $50 for Diablo II LoD and loved it. Two classes, new Items and a new chapter? Great!

I got the Age of Mythology expansion fopr Christmas the year after I got Age of Mythology. Extra faction and a new story path? Great!

Warlords for Civ IV? Three traits for leaders (a dramatic change in play there), 6 new Civs, 10 new leaders, Unique buildings, a couple new units and 8 or 9 scenarios? For $30 it was a bargain!

Granted, sometimes when I miss a game the first time around, I'll try to get it with the expansion in a package. I did that with NWN, Rise of Nations and Warcraft III. I will likely do that with Rome: Total War too.

 

Where's the "depends on the game/expansion" button?

The Dawn of War expansion Winter Assault (1 new faction) was worthwhile, and the upcoming Dark Crusade (2 new factions) looks to be the same.

The $10 things for Mechwarrior 4 and Battlefield 2, however...no way. Not a chance. for 25% of the price of a full game, I get a handful of maps and a handful of new weapons and/or vehicles? Screw that.

The expansion for Operation Flashpoint--ripoff. Excuse me, you want me to pay $30 to patch the netcode for the game so as to make it playable? Thanks, but I don't think I'll be buying from that dev or publisher again.

And so on.

 

I agree with the "depends on the game/expansion".
When Zero Hour came out (expansion for C&C Generals) I couldn't wait too much time, it is a very good expansion adding a lot of new things; as Lord of Destruction; as the expansion for Total Anihilation and some others. Then there's the Sims expansions as Wordplay mentioned, which adds almost nothing new but the price is almost the same as the 'core' game.
I recently played F.E.A.R. and soon there will be an expansion pack; I liked the game a lot so I probably will buy the pack without waiting too much time, even tho at the end it may be ending just an add on for a few new maps.

 

Sydax is right, the Total Annihilation expansions were worth it but another that I found extremely good was the broodwars expansion for Starcraft. Come on, a whole new camaign tht matches the length of the original campaign is pretty damn good. However, most of the time I do without expansions or I become really cheap and download them / burn them from a friend. So it really does depend on the original game.

 

Depends on the expansion - the option really should have been in the poll (but it's ok, we like you anyway ). Heroes 3 had 2 expansions, one was great (Armageddon's Blade), the other should IMO have been released free for people who already owned the previous one, since it added nothing but new maps. Brood War was fantastic, one of the very few expansions to outclass the original in every way, and I consider it a must-have. Diablo 2 LoD is the same - once you've played with the expansion it's hard to go back to vanilla. TotSC is a great expansion, but I wouldn't consider it essential to have if you don't plan on taking the new quests (whereas I always have Armageddon's Blade and Brood War installed even if I'm playing a "classic" map).

 

I didn't want to put "depends on the expansion" in the poll because I knew everybody would choose it. Of course it depends on the expansion. I was going for a "by and large" answer here. If I'd put "depends on the expansion" there wouldn't be a point in having a poll.

While your opinion is your own of course, I really can't understand the logic here. By itself, the expansion is useless. Yet costs 60% of what the full game costs. It only adds what amounts to about 5% of the content of the total game. How is that a bargain? Also (and maybe this belongs in the Civ4 thread) how is having a unique building "a dramatic change?" Out of the dozens of buildings civ gets, this isn't all that much of a difference.

[ September 22, 2006, 00:14: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

It also changed the traits of half the original leaders. It has dramamtically altered game play with what was added. Also, for those that care about these things, there were a bunch of new scenarios. Each one presents it's own challenges.

Further, the Unique Buildings vary from civ to civ on how useful they are. The Madrassa and the Obelisk are really useful to their respective civs, while the Ger is potent for the Mongols.

 

Of course expansions are a rip-off if you pay the full price. I am sure the profits (revenue - expenses) on these add-ons are quite great. But then, if the game is so good that you cannot do without the expansion... I figure the company might deserve it.

However, in my case I do not play the latest games, so I tend to pick the gold editions (games + expansion in one package). It comes out much cheaper. I figure I might get Civ iV in about 6 months, I am sure by that time I'll be able to get both the original and expansion for under 50 bucks.

 

All games are a ripoff if you pay full price. Bargain bins and second hand all the way for me.

 

You have to consider all the costs of putting a boxed game on a store shelf. $10? Not even worth the trouble for the developer. Paper manuals are pricey to get printed up. That's actually a big chunk right there and one of the reasons bargain bin games usually just put the manual on the disc as a PDF.

It's the reason direct download expansions (like the Oblivion and NWN stuff) can be so cheap. Cut out the middle-man and cut out the printing costs.

There's a lot of flack on the Oblivion forums about the Oblivion expansions. They're dirt cheap yet guys whine that they should be free. These are guys teenage boys still living in mom's basement as far as I can figure. Once you've lived a few years in the real world and have bills to pay, you begin to understand that life is often about scraping up every last dollar you can get your hands on. Sad but reality. In that sense, I don't fault game developers for trying to make a buck. This isn't some communist paradise where everything's free for the taking.

 

I always read the box before buying anything. That way I know whether it'll really be worth it. Rule of thumb: if they don't say about something on the box, assume it's not in there, because they'll advertise every little thing included to attempt to get you to buy it. Why? Because it's a rip-off and they know it. The real question is: Are you willing to be ripped off to get this stuff? Is it worth the absurd amount of money they charge, to you, to get these 'improvements' right now?

Myself, I rarely have to make that choice anymore. I still enjoy old games I have, so I've steadily slipped behind the curve. I picked up Morrowind and both expansions for $20. You heard me, $20. That's a lot better than when I first saw the game, by itself, up for $40 or $60, less than a year ago. (I'd heard about it here, so I looked at the first few pages of the official guide, conveniently also for sale nearby, to see what the mechanics were like and decided I didn't like it. Spell's constant talk about it in the chatroom is what convinced me to give it a shot. Thankies, BTW.)

Getting into what it would be worth for me, brings in another factor to whether expansions are worth it: personal preference. For example, the base game alone I would have paid $100 for. It's incredible. The Tribunal expansion, OTOH, sucked out loud for me. (Haven't gotten to Bloodmoon yet.) I wouldn't let them pay me to play it again (I'll be un-checking it in the Data Files in future games, but for now I need at least the data for my current one). It felt so much like BG2 Athkatla, with 50 quests packed into one little city, and after the free exploration of Vvardenfell, I felt almost claustrophobic in Mournhold. You can't levitate in the aboveground, and for some reason, after the main quest is over you can't use Recall and Intervention in Tribunal areas either. If it weren't for a unique item you get that still works, it would have taken me probably a dozen trips to get all my stuff out of there. But, some other people love it. Chev, for example, even made a post about how much he liked Tribunal as compared to the main areas. For him, that expansion might well have been worth more than the base game.

Using DR's original example, I'd say 6 new civs (whether that means races or campaigns) would be well worth it, and the rest is icing on the cake. But for him, that's not enough. In the end, you've got to read the box, judge whether it's worth it to you, and then...come back in a few months when the price isn't so steep.

EDIT: Little tidying.

[ September 23, 2006, 16:05: Message edited by: Felinoid ]

 

I'm like HB (and to some extent, Fel). I'm constantly playing catch-up with the games I've bought but haven't played yet (mainly due to ongoing BG2 runs), so there's not much point in buying a game when it first comes out when I know I won't be playing it for at least a year or more. This also has a side benefit of not needing to have top-of-the-line hardware.

 

Some expansions, as Fel said, truly suck. Chalk another Tribunal hater. BG2 Athkatla, damn right.

Doom 3 was plain crazy... never did a game freaked me out so much (in the couple first runs, at least). Resurrection of Evil cranks it one step above and resparks the thrill I had playing Doom 3. Truly well spent money.

The Sims, however, is a ripoff. My ex had the original Sims and all the expansion packs that came in time... IIRC, there's five or six of them. Whatever. *shrugs*

 

I have to go with "Depends on the Expansion". Some are great, and some are a total waste of money. After being burned a number of times on poor expansions, I now wait for reviews and patches before I make a buy decision.