The Dakotas (North and South) Discussion Thread

[nautofon]

In addition to the well-known reasons mentioned in viewtopic.php?p=1632418&hilit=demo, there is also the consideration that having a significant chunk of the game world feel like 2015 might be actively losing existing customers. Sure, on paper, old California and Nevada I-80 are slightly less of a problem with every DLC that makes the game world larger. But you can't just deactivate the base map, so a large portion of available routes will still go there. Trying to avoid that area while playing by doing "careful" job selection? Best case, it leads to corridor driving; worst case, I don't play at all and consequently don't buy new DLCs: Why pay money for a game I don't play anyway?

[xXCARL1992Xx]

the base maps of both games are the parts that are seen by most people, during the pandemic 2 F1 drivers streamt the game on twitch, both from the UK and logically they will start there, see the problem now ? thousands of people saw the "best" side of the game

[VTXcnME]

I'm not against the base rebuild. Absolutely support it, but it's a 'free' update for a almost all users. Catering to maybe a few thousand folks that might buy a game versus creating DLC that million+ who've already bought and would continue expanding on seems the better financial bet.

Edit: This forum seems very driven by hard data expectations. I'm just asking for the actual data that supports SCS's efforts will garner them all these new users via a map rebuild versus focusing on pushing new DLC. Not a 300+ page thread (that I've already been part of and read thru) filled with more expostion or guesses. I also don't see how "well they stream it" is relevant as they stream a lot of new states too. In fact I'd say unless you were really looking for outdated older game play, you'd have to dig on SCS's page to find it. New users will see the new with the old.

[flight50]

One thing to factor in as well is number of people that actually buy the map dlc's. The numbers are much lower than one would think. SCS would be lucky if even 40% of ATS owners bought the dlc's. 40% is being generous. This forum only represents a small portion.

When looking at SteamDB, ATS avgs 6-7k players a day. When a new map releases, it only goes up to 12-13k a day and then it drops off until the next map or next new truck. For ETS2, when new maps release, there is a 10k+ increase in daily avg.

[oldmanclippy]

We're never going to get hard data on whether or not the rebuilds worked for bringing in new customers. There are other variables at play: new map DLCs, new trucks, new engine updates, more people buying gaming PCs, covid, etc. SCS has to either a) give out surveys to players and ask them "what would make purchasing DLCs more attractive to you, and does that include base map reworks" or b) trust in common sense to ensure that the base map reworks aren't a waste of time.

[VTXcnME]

As I said, I'm all for the map rebuild, it makes sense. There are older outdate parts that need help.

Just getting tired of the 'it brings in new users'. It seems that comment is based solely on hyperbole vs any actual data that's been provided previously.

I'd be willing to bet, either way, that new state DLC makes up a far greater portion of SCS's ongoing revenue stream vs a sudden influx of new users based on an older map being updated.

Common sense, yes, the old map should certainly be brought up to today's standards, but it should be done in a common sense way without throwing too many current mappers or designers from new DLC teams to a rebuild team. The rebuild team has no real timetable to finish right? And honestly, they might always be chasing behind the "new DLC" guys touching up here, fixing roads there, what have you. It makes more sense to keep that team smaller than to swell it up larger.

[nautofon]

That's your opinion. You have stated clearly that you are not interested in the opinions of others. So why even talk about it?

Let's close that topic and keep this thread on discussing the Dakotas (which I know little about, but am looking forward to).

[VTXcnME]

Thanks dad. We'll try to stay on point. LOL.

And I think you missed my point. I'm trying to understand the point others make with the rebuild team makes SCS money nonsense. Yes... that questions been answered. Back to you regularly scheduled "I hope they include this" posts.

[oldmanclippy]

The base map rebuilds aren't about getting a sudden influx of new revenue, it's about laying the groundwork so that future DLCs sell more due to there being more players who are invested in the future of the game. Having a more appealing base game is part of that. It's just common sense. We'll never get hard data as to how effective it is in getting people to become invested in the game. But it's one part of the strategy, along with having more trucks, more cargo, more features, etc.

The quicker the rebuilds go, the fewer players are "lost" to having seen the base map and being unimpressed. The sooner the rebuild is finished, the more players who will see the rebuild. Not exactly rocket science.

[angrybirdseller]

Rebuild should be phased and done small increments the paid maps should be take priority to produce as that brings cash-flow. Rebuild maps are done to give the world uniformity feel of the world. Think they rebuild will go on for years and years anyways as graphic upgrades and better textures will be implemented.