Vampyr RPG Will Have No DLCs

Vampyr RPG Will Have No DLCs

Last updated on November 28th, 2017

Publisher Focus Home Interactive has revealed that they have no plans in creating any DLC for their much-anticipated single-player, RPG, Vampyr.

Vampyr – Launching Next Year!

Cédric Lagarrigue, President of Focus Home Interactive, shared the company’s stance regarding DLCs for their upcoming game in a recent talk conducted by MCVUK.  Lagarrigue spoke about Vampyr‘s  focal point being its complete single-player experience, and that DLCs would make for a fragmented one.

“This is a purely solo experience; we did not plan DLC”  said Lagarrigue

Should they feel that more content would be needed, they would rather opt for a full sequel; if the game does well in its sales. The company forecasts that Vampyr  would be profitable at 500K copies sold, and a success with a million units sold.

“We would prefer, if the reception of the game justifies it, to think about a sequel.”  Lagarrigue states ” it will be considered a success when around a million copies are sold, but it will only need half of that to be profitable”

While not having a massive budget like that of big Triple-A games, Vampyr‘s  budget still dwarfs that of an independent studio, making it sit somewhere between a large blockbuster title and an indie release. The president is confident that with the combination of its reasonably sized budget and strong premise, reaching those milestones is feasible.

Vampyr benefits from strong recognition and expectations”  says Lagarrigue “It has everything it needs to become a nice surprise on the market.”


Vampyr  puts players in the shoes of Dr. Jonathan Reid, an unfortunate victim of vampirism. Who, with newfound abilities must find a cure to the flu-ravaged citizens of the city. But, as a Vampyr, you are cursed to feed on those you vowed to heal.

Vampyr  was initially slated to launch this month, but was delayed due to technical setbacks and will instead come out early next year. To learn more about this upcoming single-player RPG, you can check out our preview on the game.

Vampyr is planned for a release in Spring 2018 for PlayStation 4, Xbox One and PC via Steam.

Visit the Vampyr Wiki

More Gaming News


Deadpixel is proud to bring you the latest in gaming news, reviews and guides from the very depths of digital hell!

View my other posts

24 comments on “Vampyr RPG Will Have No DLCs”

  1. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    It’s not that people don’t like DLC, it that they don’t like content that, by fair reason, should already be in the game, but is instead cut off and sold to us at additional costs.

    It does seem a little sad that a game developer saying "we are NOT going to try to sell you content that should already be in the game to begin with" is something that should be praiseworthy. Buuuuuut, a silver lining is that at least devs are making it known that it isn’t something that should become standard.

  2. Avatar TSMP says:

    This, entirely.

    From the quote snippets, it at least doesn’t sound like they’re bragging about their stance; I think they, too, think it should be ‘the norm’ rather than a ‘bold new position’. It’s kind of funny that we’re basically coming full circle with design philosophy, though. It’s like, apparently the people who started the industry had the right ideas in the first place, and we never actually improved past that point.

  3. Avatar Lich180 says:

    There may be enough people around now who agree – cut content added as DLC and predatory microtransactions are not the way the video game industry should be headed.

    There’s a Reddit post from EA, explaining their pricing model for the new Star Wars Battlefront game. Their response to criticism has 240k down votes as of now, and it’s only getting worse.

    Hopefully more devs take note of this, and not be so greedy.

  4. Avatar TSMP says:

    That makes no sense at all. The game isn’t even out yet, and they’re treating this stuff like it’s things they’re adding in. What’s more, they’re talking like it’s priced according to what the average player is willing to do, but it’s obvious they’re actually targeting those random few lunatics who drop thousands of dollars into a game to look good in front of other people. Except, again, the game isn’t even out yet, so ‘looking good’ doesn’t mean anything at this point in time.

    Although, now I kind of want to see a game that’s designed around a typical microtransaction philosophy, except without the ability to actually pay for anything. Make it as much like the new Battlefront as is legally possible (keeping in mind that calling it a parody lets you stretch that a whole lot further), with the goal of pointing out that, if the parody game cannot succeed equally as well as the actual game, then EA’s marketing line is indefensible bullshit.

  5. Avatar Lich180 says:

    The microtransactions in Star Wars Battlefront 2 are actually pay to win. Loot boxes give you permanent damage bonuses, speed enhancements, shields and other combat advantages. People who haven’t bought any boxes are grouped with those who have, to encourage the people who have not bought boxes to buy some after getting schooled by someone who has spent money.

    This is the definition of pay-to-win in my book. Microtransactions that grant combat advantages you can’t get easily by just playing the game, in a multiplayer game.

  6. Avatar Fallenangel700 says:

    Genuine expansions, like Oblivion’s Shivering Isle expansion, are really good. Loot Boxes, like Battlefront, and cut content DLCs are cancer and should be purged. It’s a shame that the latter is making these guys steer away from DLC altogether.

    Also, I was on the fence about BF2, but I don’t think I’ll be getting it now. Pay to Win is never a fun time.

  7. Avatar Lich180 says:

    I’m ok with microtransactions and loot boxes SOMETIMES. The way Overwatch, Elder Scrolls Online and a few other games handle them (all cosmetic stuff, can be earned by playing the game for a few hours, or bought with in game currency) is ok.

    Expansions that add new things to the game (ESO Morrowind, Dark Souls 3’s DLC) are ok, because their cost is reasonable for the content provided.

    Combat advantages, better weapons, impossible or require 40 hours of play to unlock is evil. Cut content put into a "DLC" that costs a third of what the base game cost is evil. Loot boxes are effectively gambling that targets the young and weak willed.

    Hopefully Vampyr will be a good game on it’s own merits, and what I see happening is indie and small time developers will be the saviors of gaming, while companies like EA and Activision catch hell for their crappy practices.

  8. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    I have a video that applies to this discussion.
    Screw it, for some reason the video won’t come in right, so here’s the link

  9. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    The fact that they even fu*ked up the mechanic of unlocking content (characters, levels, etc.), something that has been in video games since……soooo long ago, is amazing. Also, again with that, "we appreciate your passion" BS. It’s so insincere, they should just stop bothering with it.

    Also also, the dislikes are at 490K, although the poster was given 45 "reddit gold" for the post too, whatever that is, though it sounds valuable.

  10. Avatar Lich180 says:

    Reddit Gold is… Weird. Someone has to buy the Gold thing, then give it to someone. It’s like a "this is a fine message" thing in Dark Souls. I don’t understand it myself.

    Also, shills can buy gold and give it to comments supporting the shill, to help force opinions.

  11. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    I looked it up, and it’s actually the same thing as being a VIP on Fextra. You buy gold for 4$ a month, or 30$ a year IIRC, and it gives you access to bonus stuff and features. You can also gift it to other people, so I guess they get the advantages, so it basically functions like the candy in Deadman Wonderland.

  12. Avatar Fexelea says:

    It’s very similar in theory, but I think the realities are a bit skewed. Reddit sells it as "help pay for server time". You know because they don’t make enough money as the fifth largest website in the world, and it’s not like the are going public… oh wait they are.

    Our VIP is meant to create a sustainable community not dependent on advertisements, where people don’t have to see adverts but can still keep the site online by contributing to its expenses. I imagine we would still have VIP if we got to the size of Reddit, but I don’t think I’d be as shameless to claim it’s to pay for the servers and own up that it would be to pay bonuses to our possible coders ;)

  13. Avatar qeter says:

    gonna buy a fith monkey with a type writer eh fex?
    as i understand it a post with too many dislikes would normally be automatically removed, if the comment is given gold, "gilding" it, it becomes resistant to this filter. aka people want to preserve the comment so they can down-vote it more/ preserve it.

    on another note both twitter and uber are two examples of large web companys making negative moneys despite their success. granted i think they are both privately owned.

  14. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    I heard about that on a youtube video of ten companies you didn’t know are going bankrupt. Amazon ranked

  15. Avatar qeter says:

    i think the difference is that amazon has a lot more actual value in their company. they are the only ones in position to implement drone delivery networks and they already have a massive distribution system.
    price to earnings is 285 and their stock price is over a thousand a share. i think their good.

    uber has been on loans since day one and they are banking on beating google to the automatons vehicle game, something they appear to be falling at. Twitter is in a similar boat to uber but replace investors making a gamble with that sweet Saudi oil money.

  16. Avatar Lich180 says:

    This is a patent. What it does is detail an algorithm to match people who do buy loot crates (that provide combat advantages) with those who don’t.

  17. Avatar Fexelea says:

    I don’t buy for a second that those companies don’t make money – I think they just don’t want to pay taxes. Just like all those Hollywood movies have never made a profit :P

  18. Avatar qeter says:

    uber bleeds money. they’re a total bubble that will pop once investors give up.

  19. Avatar Fexelea says:

    I meant twitter and facebook.

    An acquaintance of mine was hired by facebook out of college, and 2 years later is on a 500k salary.

  20. Avatar Lich180 says:

    I have a friend who recently moved to Seattle to work for Facebook.

    Don’t know how much he’s making, but Facebook paid for his move, and his temp housing until he could buy one.

    Gotta get that advertising money. Recently I heard accusations of their phone app (which requires microphone access) listening in on conversations, then using those conversations to generate ads.

    Pretty sure it’s true, as my cousin was talking with his wife about how crappy the hospital furniture was (they had a kid) and he opened his Facebook app to see a bunch of Wayfair ads.

  21. Avatar EldritchImagination says:

    …………………………………………………………………………is said acquaintance looking to adopt a 20 year old American boy?

  22. Avatar Fexelea says:

    Doubtful as it’s a 25 year old Chinese lol

  23. Avatar Lich180 says:

    Never know. Maybe a roommate?

  24. Avatar TSMP says:

    I think, as far as get-rich-quick schemes go, selling your scruples for 500K yearly isn’t that bad, all things considered.

    My scruples are worth a tiny bit more, though. Not by much, but still.

Log in to leave a Comment