Factorio Roadmap for 1.0.

[Rhom]

RE: 0.15

Please hurry.

[Hoeloe]

I know, 0.15 is done when it's done...
But I can't wait any longer for it!

[Matthias_Wlkp]

We have some plans for DLC, or a free update
Nothing is set in stone, but we have a lot ideas for factorio content that would that would fit nicely in something like an expansion pack or a 1.1 release

I know the subject of DLCs might be controversial, however if done correctly, this could extend the life of the game dramatically.

I believe Paradox Team did a good job maintaining Crusader Kings for 5 years with new free and paid content every couple of months. That is a business model I would definitely support for Factorio.

[Sacredd]

Paradox did a piece of s**t out of EU VI and CK II with the DLCs.
Developers are forced to add just anything to get more and more money - do you belive this will lead to good stuff?
I loved EU IV and liked CD II really (my steam account is GentlyLotus and i have 1,4k hours EU IV).
They are creating more and more crap, but don't really care about bugs and multiplayer problems.

I would prefer to pay 5 € every month for factorio (which can be optional, but I will do it).
So factorio content will makes sense and maybe factorio provide addionally a server service ingame for that.
Would be much better imo.
I would like to pay to factorio developers, instead of a hoster, which is providing half ready factorio environment/server...

[Matthias_Wlkp]

I don't want to argue the quality of Paradox's work. The business model is what is interesting and driving the development of the game for 5 years+. Releasing DLCs is not that different from making the game in the first place - it's selling the ideas.

From customer's point of view I think it's better to pay for something, rather than hook onto a monthly fee. It's also more motivating for the studio to finish the add-on and release it in good shape to cash in on the sales.

[Arucard]

I think a monthly fee is not so easy to get behind, it usually makes me think twice and I've only ever paid monthly for server hosting since that does make sense to me. It's twice as hard to convince a new player the game is worth not only the base price you pay, but also a monthly subscription than it is to have an optional DLC to add end-game/customization/etc., which they could decide to add later after trying the base game. Of course, even that would be a hard sell with all the amazing mods that are now very easy to add to your game even from within it.

It just seems the term "DLC" carries a bad connotation, as they have been used for cash grabs and excuses for missing/unfinished content. In the case of Factorio, maybe a more techie term would sound better, like Game Extension Module? In any case, I really doubt these guys would push out some cheap add-on just to cash in, they aren't being forced to put out DLC like some bigger publishers do. Besides some little tweaks and maybe a nicer ending, the game could certainly be considered complete at this stage or even before, anything after this point I wouldn't even consider icing on the cake; It's more like a second helping of ice cream after you finish your cake with sprinkles and syrup. And a float. All these things are not necessary, maybe even little to no nutritional value, but if you're still hungry you may be willing to pay for them before you're done.

-Waiting with mixed emotions for .15

[Deadlock989]

I agree DLC has a bad connotation. It is also arguably moot for a game with a decent modding platform. Why would I pay for expansions when I can also download half-decent ones for free?

Factorio is the only game I can think of that handled Early Access / paid beta well. The guys and girls behind it should be proud of conducting themselves with integrity. It helped that this game was already addictive and satisfying even in the early stages of development, but mostly it's been the honesty and transparency with a dash of humility. I think messing with DLC in the current climate is a big and unnecessary risk.

Rather than paying over and over for more snippets of game-extension, I would prefer to see a satisfying line drawn under things and then work on Factorio 2. With three dimensions. If it's more money and job security you want, given my positive experience of supporting Factorio since the fairly early days, I'd pay for early access to a sequel without a second's hesitation.

[Anyone]

Regarding income, if an initial price is not enough to cover the game expenses, provide services people can pay for: Game services, such as hosting. I don't mind renting a (cloud based) server for games. Sure I can rent a VPS at my own hosting company, but I really can't be arsed with the setting up and maintenance of the whole server.

[thiras]

Let's check what other crafting games did.

Terarria -> has no DLC. Get updates for years free.
Minecraft -> has no DLC. Get updates for years free.
Dwarf Fortress -> has no DLC. Get updates for years free.

Why? Because DLCs kill games, especially crafting games.

Also Terraria and Minecraft, both, one of the most sold indie games(still). They are still quite profitable businesses.

Conclusion; no need to DLC. Just update the game regularly and don't be too greedy.

[MeduSalem]

[...]

Conclusion; no need to DLC. Just update the game regularly and don't be too greedy.

That only works if you have a game with a theme that isn't too specific/complex for the average player... in other words a game that is built with the goal in mind to attract as many players as possible.

... and I think that while Factorio sold very well indeed (more than I expected to be honest), I think that for the average player it is too complex and too specific, which will eventually cause the market to become saturated, after which they won't attract any new players anymore or at least not as many as they used to... and that's when they will have to stop updating because it just doesn't pay off anymore... or start with charging money for DLCs as regular updates.


That said why do people always go directly to mediocre DLCs/Microtransaction Crap?

As if there haven't been other forms of marketing in the past... like for example fullscale Addons that expand the game in a larger, more meaningful way that justifies taking several bucks for it.

That way they could develop whole new areas of the game (like another planet, space platforms or whatever they want to do) while also providing certain quality of life improvements for the base game and players without the addon as a side effect of developing the addon... and which could also be done in an early access fashion just like the base game used to be.

[realm174]

That said why do people always ...

<rant>
We could do the "why" game forever... It really goes with whatever "people" fancy or not.. I do agree with the whole DLC being usually crap (and I won't even mention games that have DLC almost as expensive as the original game, for very little added content". But anyway, we could also go with "Why do people always expect games to update weekly?" I can see if a game is broken/unplayable, so one would want to have a fix out as quickly as possible. But just look through the forums on here (or on Steam for that matter) and the constant threads on "when is 0.xx coming out?" in various forms... Yes, getting new versions could be exciting, and like a lot of people, I do check from time to time to see if there's anything new on the next release, but it doesn't stop me from playing the game in its current state, and quite frankly, I see no point in the constant/numerous threads asking for the next release. It's as if people think that creating yet another thread will accelerate the release of the game.

In my opinion, whether it's DLC content, pay to play, weekly/monthly new releases, it really makes no difference. People will want more, preferably for free, and will still constantly be demanding new updates and be impatient about the release dates.

My biggest beef with the constant updates/releases is mostly for the modding community. We've seen it in other popular games (Minecraft comes to mind) where they had so many releases that were breaking mods that modders eventually got fed up. They spent all their time updating their mods to make it "work" with the new weekly release rather than adding new and interesting features. Factorio is not much different. Every time there's been an update that required modders to update their stuff, those of us who play with mods had to either play vanilla for a while, or wait (and complain in some cases) about this or that mod that hasn't been updated yet.

So why do people always go to the DLC model? Why do people always expect all the bugs to be fixed, yet still want new major features every time there's any update? I don't know.. because we live in a society where people just always want "more" of whatever?

</rant>

[henke37]

That said why do people always go directly to mediocre DLCs/Microtransaction Crap?

As if there haven't been other forms of marketing in the past... like for example fullscale Addons that expand the game in a larger, more meaningful way that justifies taking several bucks for it.

So what is the difference between a paid addon and DLC? Not being crap?

[MeduSalem]

So what is the difference between a paid addon and DLC? Not being crap?

The major difference for me is that "classic" addons more commonly contain content worth their money... or at least they used to before game companies/publishers put more effort into becoming marketing bloodsuckers than delivering a good game and hence started to charge 1/2 to 2/3 the original games' price for a 1/4 to 1/5 the content of the original game... so basically overcharging players unproportionally.

And nowadays most DLCs/Microtransaction/Season Pass stuff are even worse than that because they sell 1-2 small things for 5-10 bucks and which could have been part of the base game already and usually were already co-developed with the base game. Eventually there is so much stuff to buy additionally that you spend twice or triple the amount the money you spent on the base game... but you didn't really get twice or triple the content.

Which is mainly why most people are upset/salty when they hear the term DLC nowadays. A lot of people would agree that it basically stands for ripping off players... and I largely agree to that opinion as well.


I mean don't get me wrong, I may be from a different time period of pc gaming before 2003 (basically before Steam started to rise to power) where stuff like...

• DLCs
• Microtransactions
• Season Pass
• Premium Content and Premium Currency
• Cosmetic stuff
• Free2Play and Pay2Win
• Pre-Order Bonus
• Early and Alpha Access
• Crowdfunding

... and a lot of other marketing tricks I can't even think of didn't even exist. Back then you bought the base game and that's it. If the game sold unexpectedly well the company made an addon with half the content of the original for half the price of the original. And if that went well then maybe a second one... or they outright made a fully fleshed out sequel. It's just nowadays that a lot of people think that there are no other ways than what is in the list above.

[kovarex]

We wouldn't make DLC, we would make an expansion. That is the difference.
Broodwar and Throne of bhaal is Expansion, new skin of weapon is DLC.

[Deadly-Bagel]

Hmm, DLC stands for DownLoadable Content, by definition it's just extra stuff you download for the game. Certainly Steam lists all types of additional purchases and downloads for a game as DLC.

It would depend on how expansions are applied as to if they're DLC under that logic. if it replaces game files then it would be better classed as an update. If it integrates by inserting itself as a module (such as the way mods work in Factorio) it fits the definition of DLC. Of course it gets vague when you, say, add new map files and update one existing file to put a door in to the new area... So I guess the best way to define it is how easy it is to remove or deactivate while keeping the original game intact.

Of course you guys would probably just build it into the base game as an update so either way it's not DLC but still ^^

[Xenomorph]

We wouldn't make DLC, we would make an expansion. That is the difference.
Broodwar and Throne of bhaal is Expansion, new skin of weapon is DLC.

There are two types of DLCs. The one which comes for free and the other must been paid. But if you make an expansion like Broodwar it will be not for free. This makes me sad

In the vanilla factorio are so much usefull things to add, and when you plan to make an expansion at the point the game isn't still released means your are hold back content.

Back to the definition of DLC and expansion. If a DLC just add stuff and things, than must your planned expansion add a new campain, new units, new stuff and maybe some new resources, right?

[Wackerstamfer]

In the vanilla factorio are so much usefull things to add, and when you plan to make an expansion at the point the game isn't still released means your are hold back content.

There's a difference between adding content to get a finished game and ideas for content that could be an addition but not needed to achieve a finished game and as such are not developed.

I would not call that holding back content.

[xng]

I really like that we get some feedback on the status of 0.15 in the friday facts, thanks for that.

As for DLC, bot skins and expansions are downloadable content. If it is made worth it and not adding missing features that feels like they should be in the original game it still can feel honest enough, with a decent pricetag, towards the backers that made factorio possible.

One important thing to remember when comparing like this is that the backers of Starcraft only wanted their money back with interest, and they gave the backers their money back with interest by selling extras like Broodwars.

In Factorio the backers are the players, and they only want more and better features, more value for their backing buck, and all extra content is the interest of the backing money they gave Wube Software before the game was released as a full version (which has not happened yet, as of this day new backers every day put their money in the trust that Wube will be able to finish this project , and that they will get good extra value for giving the money ahead of time).

[Ausprit]

My biggest beef with the constant updates/releases is mostly for the modding community. We've seen it in other popular games (Minecraft comes to mind) where they had so many releases that were breaking mods that modders eventually got fed up. They spent all their time updating their mods to make it "work" with the new weekly release rather than adding new and interesting features. Factorio is not much different. Every time there's been an update that required modders to update their stuff, those of us who play with mods had to either play vanilla for a while, or wait (and complain in some cases) about this or that mod that hasn't been updated yet.

How hard would it be to give a notice on the API changes for modders to update their mods prior release? Even better, a script/documentation on how to convert mods from one version to the other? You could even keep some secret addition that doesn't change the other API parts.

Then again, you could argue that experimental releases are already a form of notice...

[daniel34]

How hard would it be to give a notice on the API changes for modders to update their mods prior release? Even better, a script/documentation on how to convert mods from one version to the other? You could even keep some secret addition that doesn't change the other API parts.

Then again, you could argue that experimental releases are already a form of notice...

IIRC a few days before the 0.13.0 experimental release we got a preview of the API changes on the lua-api page. I think it helps somewhat, but not that much. If there's a big change in the API you have no way to test if your code works, if it's just a small change then it usually doesn't take much time to update your mod which could also just be done after the experimental release.

There also is the 0.15 modding related changelog as of March 6, 2017 which is probably a better read as it only contains the changes instead of having to compare the new API with the old one. It also includes stuff not found in the API.