The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

North Dakota and South Dakota will be a single DLC or will be separate and each their own DLC?

Single DLC
124
74%
Separate DLC
43
26%
 
Total votes: 167

User avatar
Marcello Julio
Posts: 5665
Joined: 12 Nov 2016 19:27
Location: Ceará, Brazil

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#21 Post by Marcello Julio » 09 Aug 2022 09:59

Yes, that's exactly my opinion. The Dakotas don't deserve to be released separately. Here could be the big opportunity to make the two states together in a single DLC.
User avatar
Polarlicht
Posts: 3356
Joined: 21 Oct 2018 21:00
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#22 Post by Polarlicht » 09 Aug 2022 15:13

Î was really surprised MT was 12 bucks! Texas will most likely be around 18 bucks. Those "smaller" states if they are single no more than a 10er
User avatar
clifflandmark
Posts: 904
Joined: 13 Oct 2020 16:36
Location: Urfa
Contact:

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#23 Post by clifflandmark » 09 Aug 2022 15:39

I want them single. Looking forward to Mt. Rushmore, Deadwood and some Deadwood historic characters name for South Dakota.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#24 Post by flight50 » 09 Aug 2022 15:45

^You can still get all that if they come bundled. Bundled doesn't change what in them.
User avatar
Marcello Julio
Posts: 5665
Joined: 12 Nov 2016 19:27
Location: Ceará, Brazil

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#25 Post by Marcello Julio » 09 Aug 2022 17:04

The characteristics of each state will exist. They being released together is more a matter of both states sharing many characteristics and in size being released separately doesn't make much sense. The two Dakotas together is almost the Montana size.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#26 Post by Tristman » 09 Aug 2022 17:51

Selling them as a bundle also saves the marketing time and cost (blogs, streams, everything regarding Steam) for doing 2 releases compared to 1.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#27 Post by flight50 » 09 Aug 2022 18:08

^I never thought of that but definitely true. You get more bag for your buck. Dakota's dlc just sounds better than North Dakota and South Dakota. Much easier to market combined. There are tons of people that A) consider them as flyovers and may skip them B) complain they are not bundled and C) cheaper. Better to sell both at $17.99 than both for $23.98 separately. Tell me which price you'd rather pay? You pay an extra $5.99 if they are solo. There are enough people complaining about price as is.

For everything great that both states have, combine under one dlc would be a huge marketing help that will convince more people to buy vs solo. Remember that bundled does not mean you must by bundled. Both states should be made simultaneously by 2 different teams and released together to make a bundle. If you don't want both, don't buy the bundle. But for those that want both, a bundle is wise.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#28 Post by Tristman » 09 Aug 2022 18:15

I meant the lower marketing costs are a pro for SCS, but yeah they are a pro for the players as well :)
User avatar
VTXcnME
Posts: 1243
Joined: 04 Jun 2021 12:53

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#29 Post by VTXcnME » 09 Aug 2022 23:35

There's a big difference between two DLC's being produced separately but sold at the same time at a discount vs calling the states 'bundled'. In the sense we've been talking, that's essentially saying the DLC content will be produced/edited and created as one unit. Maybe it's a semantic conversation, but after the wee wee slap someone else got for going slightly off topic (eye roll here) on a different 300 page thread... it seems semantics and protocol are heavily favored here.

But to my point. There is going to be enough DLC bundled (If SCS does it the way everyone here keeps speculating) down the road that might be close to, but not quite XXX square miles for $11.99. Might be as much as 20,000 sq miles short. The trade off is making the money on these states that ARE 70,xxx sq mile sized states. It's absolutely a trade off. No one thought Montana was going to be $11.99, but it was.... I'm guessing because SCS knew they'd make up a little bit on the two eastern border states. And I'm okay with that. If it keeps consistency of the DLC price and size, I'm okay with it, every now and again. But I know @flight50 has mentioned before, and I whole heartedly agree with the idea that Montana and Texas sized DLC will ONLY happen for Montana and Texas DLC. After that, we're back to smaller states. Sometimes maybe bundled. Sometimes not. Montana was 140,000 sq miles. The DLC "bundle" being proposed here: 147,820. I'm not saying it won't happen. But it would be absolutely an out of left field play if they did it. It would be a terrible financial move, business wise. Flight and others have said it, we aren't going to start seeing ETS chunks here.... we'll get big states as single DLC and smaller ones (hopefully) as bundled DLC, or as single states released at a lower rate. If Texas for some ungodly reason (and I don't believe this will be the case, reread that: I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WILL BE THE CASE, put the flame throwers down all) comes out at $11.99, I'd absolutely expect that money they didn't ask for Texas would be made up in future DLC.

Calling it bundled means everything happens together. Production/marketing/higher fixed price point. Creating two separate products side by side with separate teams and two separate marketing efforts, but then selling two states as a buy X get Y for Z% off is a different conversation all together. Semantics, maybe. But I don't see them bundling these states for both financial and the reasons listed above.

I also haven't seen this constantly mentioned price point argument yet. Maybe I haven't been looking for it, but I haven't seen it anywhere here. If it exists here and I've missed it, 100% apologies. But I'd like someone to point out more than a few instances of it. Judging by the worldoftrucks ticker logging the miles in Cruising Montana, I'm guessing that's not a real big concern. About 125 hours into Montana's release and the cruising goal is already at 62,863,XXX miles. Just a little over 5 full days, and we're over 62% of the way to the 100,000,000 miles goal. That is not an insignificant statistic. I think the "people are complaining about the price point" is another one of those phantom fact arguments to essentially say "shut up" to the people who are disagreeing with you.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3298
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

#30 Post by angrybirdseller » 10 Aug 2022 08:15

If Texas sells at 17.99, then it possible to do Dakotas at 17.99.

If Texas sells at 11.99 scs will very unlikely sell any state west of Mississippi River will sell as bundle.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DEDE62, Gasconha18, KaLypso, MattB2100, Truckcrasher68 and 13 guests