Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #88 - Voice of the People narrative content improvements

[dancinggrass]

Then why did you release it? Delay, rework, release when it is satisfactory. You essentially admit to creating a subpar product, even yourself not liking it, and selling it anyway.

In creative works there's a saying that "perfect is the enemy of good". It's common for creators to sell unsatisfactory product. Movies have plot holes, books have incoherent sections, paintings lack expressions, and so on. Not to mention reception is a different matter.

 

[Geredis]

I appreciate all that you've said here regarding the DLC and patch mechanics going forward as part of this rather candid explanation of plans to right some of the missteps of VOTP's launch and general reception.

However, I am disappointed that I haven't seen you guys rather more candidly discuss the matter of the pre-order bonuses for the DLC - and in particular why it was thought of as a good idea in the first place. I appreciate some of that candor surrounding journal entries and mechanics not living up to expectations and your plans to rectify many of those shortcomings. However I believe that no small part of the reception has centered around the initial plan for intending to hide several highly-related agitators through a pre-order requirement: and this is coming from someone that would have gotten the pre-order anyway via the Ultimate Edition purchase back when the game initially launched.

Many could say that this aspect of things has no narrative impact, I'd say given VOTP's focus on France, the fact that all of those agitators were French, and the fact that agitators are intended to have a more integrated role in many of these narrative updates/adjustments to patch content, I think that given the interrelatedness of everything, it's something that should be addressed.

 

[Muskar XII]

This is in large part why we want to update the scripted French AI logic to account for rulers of the different dynasties!

Will the fact that the Bourbon path leads sometimes to having Carlist on the throne been taken into account ?
(I also thinks that the question of Henri d’Artois succession should be take into account).

 

[Oglesby]

Any chance to add a Journal Entry regarding French Intervention in Mexico?

From up thread.

I would like to know, if you have ever considered implementing a journal entry to simulate Napoleon's Franco-Mexican war. It is an important event with enormous ahistorical potential. In addition it can play several actors, Mexico, France, Austria, the United States etc ... Anyway, I wanted to know if you plan to add it in the next update or later? Thank you

It's actually one of the things we've discussed recently, but the consensus in the design team is that we don't think we can do it justice with the current mechanics. It's definitely a candidate for later though.

 

[Cizm7]

"Due to its sandboxy, systemic nature Victoria 3 is not the easiest game to write historical content for".

Well, in that case and for starter, it's high time to rework the whole game in order to propose a sandbox according to the "four pillars" of the game presented in #00 and which supposedly led the game development so far.

Let's take one example, only one : The governement . As it is, it is simply a dull widget.
There is no Cabinet. At least a prime minister, an Economy minister and a Secretary of State for War and Diplomacy, with prerogatives (different wether it is a Republic or a anything else), with modifiers according to the Party and the characters would have been a bare minimum. And the abibility to propose a law can't be the same for a Monarchy or a Parliamantary Republic. etc Politics should be made as a "war system". Because that's what it is at the end of the day. Yet it is a simple linear waiting system embellished with random Events.. And on top of that add another question : how is it different in each Nation ? And I'm not even thinking about the evolution of Parties Stances (about taxes, about diplomacy position, about, well you name it...), their inner conflicts, or coalitions, or elections.

This massive problem makes the game incredibly boring. As you refuse to develop the War mechanic because Victoria is supposed to simulate a Society, why don't you simulate Societies for the player ?

Also, It feels a lot that the game is heavily Politically biaised. That is unsufferable. Not a Sanbox feeling if you ask me.

The same can be said for e-ve-ry aspect of the game. I hear and read everywhere "Potential !". I thought this way in the beginning of my experience too, not anymore. In general, Victoria 3 pretends to abstract or macro, but the excruciating lack of tangible concepts just make it abysmally empty. And a lot should be said also about the impossibility of identification that kills the interest of the player and makes every Nation identical except, maybe, with special content like this one for France.

Victoria 3 is the first Paradox game I bought. I got hyped, and bought a Grand Edition in March after 1.2.4. Today, I have zero Inclination to play the game. I don't think I'll touch it again before Sphere of Infuence is implemented. And I'm not optimistic.

On the other hand, I think Victoria 3 provides a somptuous Atmosphere. The music, the maps, and every illustration are fantastic. But, well, is it enough ?

I bought CK3 a few days ago (the whole package, again). So, this cold and harsh Critic is not a break up.

 

[grommile]

Also, It feels a lot that the game is heavily Politically biaised.

If a game about politics feels biased to you, that probably just means you don't agree with the people who wrote it.

If it doesn't feel biased to you, that definitely just means you do agree with the people who wrote it.

 

[Cizm7]

If a game about politics feels biased to you, that probably just means you don't agree with the people who wrote it.

If it doesn't feel biased to you, that definitely just means you do agree with the people who wrote it.

Or maybe I know a little enough to perceive that there is a Tendency and I can see it making the game boring instead of adding contrary Element that would balance the game ?

 

[Herennius]

Or maybe I know a little enough to perceive that there is a Tendency and I can see it making the game boring instead of adding contrary Element that would balance the game ?

You think/feel that there is a tendency. That doesn't necessary equal that there is one or means that everyone needs to agree with your view. I for my part don't feel that there is a bias. Sure, the game starts out with fairly "conservative" societies and there are "progressive" forces trying to change things (as it was in history), but I neither have the impression that the progression towards more liberal laws is inevitable or too easy nor the opposite. I also don't think that the one or other way of playing the game (staying conservative vs. reforming) is more fun/exciting than the other.

But maybe you are refering to something else - then please elaborate to allow further discussing

 

[Unknown Unknown]

"You were not satisfied with the narrative content included in Voice of the People, and neither are we."

So why did you release it?

 

[grommile]

So why did you release it?

When someone not only displays contrition, but declares an intention to make amends, this kind of reaction tends to discourage them from doing so in future.

 

[Herennius]

When someone not only displays contrition, but declares an intention to make amends, this kind of reaction tends to discourage them from doing so in future.

Plus that very likely the devs, who wrote this DDs for us and displayed that contrition, didn't make the decision to release it anyway on the scheduled date...so while the question is understandable, directing it at the devs is to me addressing it to the wrong people.

 

[Unknown Unknown]

When someone not only displays contrition, but declares an intention to make amends, this kind of reaction tends to discourage them from doing so in future.

It seems like a fairly straightforward question to ask. This game is over £40 on Steam.

 

[Lazy Sorcerer]

Lesson for the ages: Whining and raising hell online works. It got us Autonomous Investment Pool, it got us stripe occupation and now it's getting us JE overhaul. Pay no attention to naysayers who want to defend a for-profit corporation online - whine whenever you are dissatisfied. If it didn't work, Karens would not be doing it irl.

 

[Lazy Sorcerer]

If a game about politics feels biased to you, that probably just means you don't agree with the people who wrote it.

If it doesn't feel biased to you, that definitely just means you do agree with the people who wrote it.

About 80% of the named political Agitators are some flavor of socialist. There should be a whole lot more of liberal nationalists methinks.

 

[grommile]

About 80% of the named political Agitators are some flavor of socialist. There should be a whole lot more of liberal nationalists methinks.

This is excellent feedback; it's specific, relevant, and actionable.

 

[Cizm7]

You think/feel that there is a tendency. That doesn't necessary equal that there is one or means that everyone needs to agree with your view. I for my part don't feel that there is a bias. Sure, the game starts out with fairly "conservative" societies and there are "progressive" forces trying to change things (as it was in history), but I neither have the impression that the progression towards more liberal laws is inevitable or too easy nor the opposite. I also don't think that the one or other way of playing the game (staying conservative vs. reforming) is more fun/exciting than the other.

But maybe you are refering to something else - then please elaborate to allow further discussing

Your msg indicates that I may have not chosen my words carefully enough, or that you're willing to ignore my point. I said this was politically biaised, I should have said ideologically : V3 is empty and imposes an inevitable course towards a certain vision and in a fashion that are unlikely, boring and unbalanced.

There is no conflict in the game, hence no interest. Everything feels to evolve linearly and smoothly towards a certain type of society. It's only a path to one version of Progress that appears to be so obvious that for example changing the fundamental law of any country is a simple click by the player and not the result of a progress within the people. It feels biased to me (and I'm probably not the only one).

Some other examples :

Minorities : you can't get rid of them, you can't advocate for them, you can't instrumentalize them, you can't use them for any purposes, you can't declare war to absorb them. The only way to deal with them is multikulti. That is not plausible.

Economy : It's a flux, no stock to interact with the markets. Goods are internationally fungible, Quality does'nt exist and doesn't differenciate Demand, the only difference is the production cost. There is only one currency so no monetary policies, no inflation, no devaluation, no conversion rate, no image of the power of your Economy against others through the fluctuant value of national currencies. There are no private banks, there are no corporations that impose their will upon States, there is no Finance system. No stock exchange. No treasury bonds. Private insurance system isn't a buseness. Private school don't make money (they don't exist actually) and it's all public or all private - no competition. Economy is in any case and anyhow driven by the State. The autonomous investment is the only thing that can insufficiantly, succintly and awkwardly supersede all of these. Like if all of these minor things were out of interest. This is the Century of Capitalism, it is nowhere to be found. And all of these examples should have a strong impact on the society sim. That is not plausible.

Agitators : I've seen Karl, I've seen Vladimir, I've never seen the Chaplin doppleganger - I might have been unlucky ? if not, that's not plausible. In general, the vast majority of them are nice socialists.

Politics : There is no difference between regimes, they don't mean anything. They don't imply a kind of prerogatives for the Power and always offer the same scope of laws as long as in the famelic number of IGs the player has clicked those needed to make them part of the government. Elections don't matter at all. If you still want a law, you can click it even if everything in the state of things make it contradictory with the aid of an agitator, because, well, everyone knows agitators are undoubtly the voice of Reason. People don't push for or against Wars. There is no journalism in a period of development of communication, there is a sheer absence of Art movement of all sort, there are no scientific influence on the people, there are no public debate on any subject that would come across some part of the population, or between parts. In a nutshell the supposedly society sim simply is nowhere. Same for the Nations. That is not plausible.

That's a sample. My main point is that V3 is a non conflictual game and that is unsufferable. If you want to tell a story, you need identification and conflict. Those are non existant. It feels Nations don't exist. It feels Cruelty doesn't exist, it feels there is no struggle for anything no matter what and how you want to play. It's a passive game full of ridiculous widgets with no substance and a boring construction bar. It's not a sandbox it's a click-again-and-wait-box. Hence it feels biased. And that is not what the dev diary vision said it would be.

 

[Lazy Sorcerer]

This is excellent feedback; it's specific, relevant, and actionable.

I would not consider it a feedback exactly. I am against characters being in the game at all. I am just pointing the bias.

 

[Nawolith]

Good. Now to wait until that patch is out and then i can play as Napoleonic France and enjoy it all together with the Victoria Tweaks mod. Looking forward to it!

 

[SufrimientoCC]

About 80% of the named political Agitators are some flavor of socialist. There should be a whole lot more of liberal nationalists methinks.

I mean we should clarify that “socialist” in this era was synonymous with social Democrat too, though I think when you say liberal nationalists, you probably mean the bourgeoisie.

Just give me more blanquism, 19th century radicalism and Marxism please. After that get weird and allow Max Weber to become more than an agitator so I can run a legion of doom union of egoists.

 

[Atomcreator]

Then why did you release it? Delay, rework, release when it is satisfactory. You essentially admit to creating a subpar product, even yourself not liking it, and selling it anyway.

Ah, Paradox.