Playerbase Fragmentation and DLC Pricing - A Unique Solution

When I first read "DLC Price change" in Marek's blog post, I was expecting a decrease, not an increase. Contrary to what Keen says, some of these blocks do change the functionality of a build. Railings, catwalks, and stairs are a good example. We don't have non-DLC equivalents to most of the railing parts (there aren't any angled, centered, or corner cover walls). There is no non-DLC 1x1x1 staircase, or half catwalk. There are other examples of this, but these are the most prominent. I'm fine with using a sideways corridor in place of a bed for a non-DLC build, but when I have to completely redesign the exterior to accommodate a lack of catwalk, stairs, etc... I lose motivation.

This stifles creativity. I love making cool, intricate builds, but I'm apprehensive when it comes to sharing them, because they're not accessible to a large portion of the playerbase who don't own all of the DLCs. I've considered making DLC and non-DLC variants, but when I have to completely redesign a ship/build, it just becomes too much work and I don't end up posting it.

There needs to be some sort of way to address this. Back when I was toying with the idea of making my own game, I had a unique idea for DLC pricing that I think is particularly relevant to Keen's model of development. Basically, each time a new DLC is released, all of the previous ones are reduced in price by a given amount. Once the price of older DLCs reaches zero, they're added to the base game. This allows players to support the development of the game without increasingly fragmenting the playerbase with each update.

Not only does the current DLC pricing implementation stifle creativity within the existing community, it's a barrier to entry for new players. I tried to get three of my friends into SE. They all bought the base game, but after realising that they'd have to double their investment just to have access to all of the blocks, two of them refunded the base game, and one just doesn't play anymore. I'd be fine with paying 7 or 8 dollars for a DLC at launch, since I like supporting the devs. People who want to save can wait until it comes down in price, and people who only very casually play SE, who can't justify spending $30ish on all of the DLCs doesn't miss out on anything given enough time.

While it could be argued that nobody would pay if they could just wait and get them for free, I don't believe this would be the case if it's done right. If the price of old DLCs decreases 50 cents with each update released, it'd take two to three years for it to be added to the base game. That's plenty of time for it to generate revenue, and someone who is hyped for a given feature is very likely to pay rather than wait it out. As previously mentioned, I wouldn't be opposed to paying 7-8 or even 10 dollars for a DLC if it contained something I was really looking forward to in SE. If it wasn't something I was hyped for, I'd wait for it to come down a bit first, but still get it before it went free because I like supporting the devs.

If Keen really cares about the quality and consistency of the Space Engineers Community, this is the right decision to make. If implemented properly, Keen could break even compared to what they're currently making, without further fragmenting the playerbase each time they release a new update.