They were/are anti-DRM. They have a strong anti-DRM stance back before just that they choose to distribute their games through steam in recent times but their games are still DRM-free even through steam. I bought all their grand strategy games on Gamersgate, for CK2 they gave a steam backup key, for EUIV they just went straight to steam. I've ripped the games out of the steam folder and all of them worked without steam.

But of course, I rather see them on GOG. Also, of course I would want PE to remain the same and be released on GOG as stated earlier.
Ah, good to know. A clear, solid confirmation like inXile's one is all I need.
Really about time they showed a short gameplay demo walkthrough of PE.

Why the hell would you want Pdox on GOG? Look at this shit:
http://oi59.tinypic.com/34ou8sp.jpg
http://oi58.tinypic.com/adkm09.jpg
http://oi59.tinypic.com/211uzde.jpg

You've seen how people here on GOG react even to "normal" DLC...

Oh noes...optional unit sprites! The horrorz!

You do know that all of those units exist in the game without those packs, right? They just use a generic sprite. If you want them to look unique, the sprite pack gets you that. If you don't care, you still get the units with a generic look. Same with the music packs...it isn't as if the game is without music if you don't pony up.

It's all 100% optional, which is how DLC should work.

How is that a justification? It's still the same sleazy business practice which preys on psychology, that people will want to have the "complete" game so they buy, the fact that the sprites don't do anything in gameplay makes it worse, because they're trying to trick people into paying good money for basically shit all. The music packs are even more substantial, why couldn't they be included with the game soundtrack as it is?

No company "needs" to use those practices, they could do like any self-respecting company would and instead release full expansions every 6-12 months, instead of "nickle and dime" bullshit.

That crap is why Pdox is not getting a cent from me ever, I'll get there games from TPB until they get a sane DLC policy.

Most of those are cosmetic or just extra songs. Most of their games do have about 3-4 gameplay DLCs however.

They're a game publisher, they aren't your friend. It isn't their responsibility to worry about some guy who has to have every single add-on for every single game. If someone is that obsessive, they have bigger problems than a game company releasing a lot of add-ons, and they should probably take it upon themselves to seek help.

And Paradox also DO release substantial expansion DLC packages for their games. These are just purely optional extras by their art department for anyone who wants them. You call it nickel and dime bullshit, I call it 100% optional stuff that nobody needs. Want it? There it is. Don't? You don't need it. And I prefer not having unnecessary fluff like that shoehorned into bigger packages to jack up their price.

Bullshit, DLC should be actual content which gives new campaigns and so on. Pdox's model is just slimy preying on people with poor self-control when buying online.

You're right. Forget personal responsibility. We need game companies to step in and be surrogate mommy. And there's only one way things can work because...uhhh...reasons!

Good grief.

And, mobile games publishers do the same thing, I'm saying Pdox is not any better.
Of course, everything needs to be regulated to some extent, you'll find in many countries they are cracking down on how mobile/tablet games prey on people with micro-purchases.

Sure, that doesn't mean that we should just accept that all publishers are inherently evil companies that will stop at nothing to rob you of every penny. It just means that if a publisher does do questionable things, they can get called out for it, as I'm doing here, and the same way many people have been talking about Pdox's DLC model for a long time now. I suppose you've not yet encountered the concept of customer protection? The only reason they price them all in 0.99, 1.99, 2.99 tiny packs is because they seem like so little on their own, so they can sucker some people into buying them, and then package them in a "complete" edition latter for those that don't buy into the trick. Should we just call anyone who buys Pdox DLC right after day 1 an idiot? Probably, but even idiots deserve some measure of protection. Preying on the impulses of people is sleazy business practice, a good business practice would be to actually produce 29.99 full expansion packs and only that, and earn respect, instead of making cash grabs.

You can call it idealism and dismiss it, but it's not because their are companies which don't resort to those tricks. I call out Paradox because in PC gaming they're the worst at it, even say Bethesda which I'm not a fan of their games personally, at least they produce actual expansions of length and content and price them accordingly, their isn't two dozen different Dragonborn Skin Packs for different clothes.

There are many shades of grey between 'not your friend' and 'inherently evil'. The vast majority of companies fall into those shades of grey.

As for customer protection, it's important...for things that matter. Sorry, but game DLC packages don't even enter into the sphere of actually important customer concerns, like price gouging on the actual necessities of life. And while I'm all for helping people avoid being ripped off, the onus is on the consumer to decide when they're going to buy something. There is no universal truth that determines whether something is worth it or not, regardless of how much you seem to think there is. Every single buyer makes up their own mind, which is supposed to be the point.

If somebody truly is so obsessive that they have an actual need to own everything for a game regardless of cost, it's on them to seek help. It isn't the job of society, a game company, or whoever else to protect people from bad decisions. Offer help so that someone who truly does have a problem, absolutely. But the person with the problem needs to own up without everyone stepping up to act as their nanny.

Small DLC packs are priced like they are to make them an impulse buy, the same as small little items you'll find at the checkout line at a supermarket or a department store. Guess what, neither example is evil. Describing it as such, and branding anyone who buys such a package an idiot, is pretty much just overheated rhetoric. If people want their in-game version of the Bismarck to look like that specific ship, rather than looking like a generic battleship with the Bismarck name and stats, they should go right ahead and buy it. That's their call. If a person doesn't care, that's cool too. I like the fact that someone can make that choice for themselves.

Different companies have different DLC models. Again, one isn't magically and universally 'right' and another magically and universally 'wrong', regardless of how much you seem to want to see it that way. Some companies do micro-DLC. Others do larger packages. Others do both. And that's fine.

It's more than only consumer protection. It's all about ethics. Micro-DLCs being optional or not aren't the real point. It's concerning the existence of these micro-DLCs. One cannot dismiss optional micro-transactions in a facebook game or a MMO-F2P just because they are optional.

It's about ethics because micro-transactions and micro-DLCs (which are pretty similar) are based on the "whale" business model. It has been designed on the fact that some people are unable to prevent themselves to buy everything related to the game, making them "whales". Yes, indeed, those people are responsible of that model. But they aren't the only ones. Companies (even those praised by their fans) having a business model based on tempting vulnerable people (even though the number of those is tiny) are wrong. And those companies haven't right ethics.

It's about respect. And respect for the whole customer base. For human beings. I understand that debate is relevant to a higher ideological debate: can we let people do anything, and can we let companies do anything even if that means that some people will be abused because those people are naive or addict? Should we let those things happen because it's up to people to be responsible? Or should we prevent that, knowing that we cannot prevent people to be irresponsible? Freedom at any cost, even if it isn't ethical? Or trying to limit freedom in the name of ethics?

I am not a "whale", but I feel concerned for those who are, even though they don't even know themselves that they are "whales".

For the people worried with DLCs or DRM-free availability, some answers by a Obsidian developer in the FAQ topic:

About Paradox influencing with DLCs:
DLC was a misnomer on my part. We aren't releasing small chunks of content. We will be doing a full fledged expansion on par with how CRPGs used to release expansions. The partnership with Paradox does nothing to change any of that. Keep in mind that Obsidian still fully controls the IP and is the main driver for any content going forward. We will make sure we do right by our community.

Just to nip all of this in the bud, nobody is forcing Obsidian's hand here. We have chosen to partner with Paradox because we truly feel it is the best for the game and our community. Having them do the marketing and distribution will be a huge weight off of the development team and will allow us to focus more resources on the game's creation. Obsidian is still in control of Eternity's future and how we choose to make content after it is released.



About the possibility of being Steam-only:
We will still be selling the game through Steam and GOG like we had planned previously.

No chance. We will still be delivering everything we promised to our backers.

Post made by dev on their forums:

"We will be providing both Steam and GOG digital versions of Eternity. The GOG version is still going to be released. The partnership with Paradox has not changed anything we have promised to our backers."

That's great! I wants it now though ;)