and now to end this on a comical note sponsored the Precedent of the Untitled Statuses of Ameerica!
FYI people i'm joking
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
and now to end this on a comical note sponsored the Precedent of the Untitled Statuses of Ameerica!
FYI people i'm joking
Vicky 2 got only two expansions and was based on the old business model and not the new one. It was released 2 years before CK2 and was only supported for 3 years (2010-2013).
seems quaint doesn't it? ONLY 2 expansions and a 3 year support timeline. meanwhile CK2 is 5 years old and has roughly 2 1/2 full video games of post-release content and counting.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as @Auron suggest, wouldn't that mean PDI will support a game as long as it is still popular? So if CK2 is popular for more than 8 years, then the limit of support would be the theoretical limit of the game itself...
Questionable.
"Modern" treatment has a base game that gets updated and mostly disjointed additional features in DLC. This means that devs have to support version without DLCs, can't make features that depend on features in other DLCs (or at least can't make this connection deep) and can't overhaul features that were introduced in other DLCs. There are exceptions: they did rework Random New World, for example, even though it's a DLC feature. And they made development a core feature of the game connected to many systems - but it's in DLC. If you play EU4 today without Common Sense expansion you have less control over internal development that if you played it before - because before you could build all kinds of buildings and now most of province development is only possible with DLC.
Previous model was releasing expansions that were also patches. Victoria 2 without expansions has lots of bugs and most mods won't work with it unlike EU4/CK2. However, developers only had to mantain a single version of the game. They could add or rework any feature the game needed. It was sort of subscription model.
It's still a subscription model today, kinda. Playing without many expansions is not as enjoyable due to many systems relying on non-existing features and being less valuable. Development is probably the biggest offender but there are other systems like National Focus or Espionage becoming being less viable without Mare Nostrum. With old expansion model you had a game that felt more complete if you bought expansions, and those probably cost less to mantain. However, there is, of course, an appeal in having your game at least somewhat updated if you miss an expansion or two.
well that's PDSs policy. and it's simple but effective- if people want to play it, and there's more to expand in it, then they'll expand. if you make something, people will buy it.
I think that is only partway true. The devs also have goals and dreams for their own games, and they can also reach the point where they long for a less-clunky engine to work with. Obviously they are strongly influenced by player support, but there gets to be a point where you can do a whole lot of neat things you weren't able to do when the last version came out.
First off, anyone saying it's subscription based has no idea what they are talking about. Second, it seems they are massively changing the amount of dlc by merging the content packs and expansions
So I feel it's worth mentioning that at the time of Vicky 2, PDX was a much smaller and less well renowned company. I've always been a HUGE fan of strategy & grand strategy games, and I only discovered Paradox's grand strategy games a few years ago. As such I think a Victoria Sequel would have much better sales performance for this reason alone. I started with EU4, then moved on to CK2, and now also play Stellaris & HOI 4, never having played any of the original games. I also own Victoria, but havent spent much time in it due to time, but the little I have makes me love it.
Thus i'm a prime example of new customers that PDX now has access to that they didnt before.
Thus i'm a prime example of new customers that PDX now has access to that they didnt before.
Lets also remember that there was serious doubt that Vicky2 would even turn a profit. Remember the haircut?
i remember hearing about that a year or so ago. i think it was Fredrik? who thought it wouldn't turn a profit but it went on to become PIs first title to go platinum. (1 million sales)
Eh no the game sold 70 000 copies which was the number needed to make Vicky2 profitable and is why he shaved his head... As far as I can remember we haven't given out any sales numbers besides that on Vicky 2.
really? i can't remember where i heard it (it was like 2+ years ago) but someone in the company said that vicky 2 was the first to hit one of the big sales milestones.
If they do a Vicky 3, you should get Fredrik to commit to growing a beard or having a mohawk or something if it becomes profitable (and you should _so_ do a Vicky 3)
.
I really loved Vic.2 but I loved much more Vic.1 . Even with the latest expansion , I had the feeling that something, impalpable, was missing in V.2.
With the EU series it was the opposite and any "version +1" appeared to me as a decisive improvement : no regret for what they changed or removed.
This without talking about CK2; It's amazing for me 5+ years and I'm still waiting next DLC to start a new campaign and experiment the new content.. I never seen such a lasting game!
Returning to VIC.2 I thing that more than his "old business model" was Pdox itself not truly believing in her own game to determine its premature "death".
See Stellaris, as an opposite. A good game, very promising but .. let's admit , quite boring in the long run. Paradox invested and is investing a lot, all the new content they are going to releasing it's amazing, a true quantum leap.
This is believing in its own product!
Tl;Dr; : Rome.2 and Vic.3 soon, please
With the EU series it was the opposite and any "version +1" appeared to me as a decisive improvement : no regret for what they changed or removed.
This without talking about CK2; It's amazing for me 5+ years and I'm still waiting next DLC to start a new campaign and experiment the new content.. I never seen such a lasting game!
Returning to VIC.2 I thing that more than his "old business model" was Pdox itself not truly believing in her own game to determine its premature "death".
See Stellaris, as an opposite. A good game, very promising but .. let's admit , quite boring in the long run. Paradox invested and is investing a lot, all the new content they are going to releasing it's amazing, a true quantum leap.
This is believing in its own product!
Tl;Dr; : Rome.2 and Vic.3 soon, please
If you release V3 I promise to buy every expansion at full price. I am also willing to send you personally some money on the side. Talk to me.
I s
Say the fourmites all start a go fund me page where we directly pay paradox to make the game XD would be funny if it worked but I doubt it
I s
Say the fourmites all start a go fund me page where we directly pay paradox to make the game XD would be funny if it worked but I doubt it
It could be nice.
Wouldn't you invest 5€ for having VIc.3 or your Dream Game ?
Alter all in the crowdfunding initiative you are not charged until the minimum level of budget has been met.
And that sum could also give some "pre order goodies" for free .
Problem is that I've no idea of the required budget .. My best guess is that a Pdox game needs something like 3-5 M€ for it's initial development and release
aruon said:
By my estimates based on open source data, i'd say the total sales are somewhere around 400k copies as of today, which is not too shabby.
Disclaimer : use of open source data to estimate sales number of a game is strongly discouraged by some people, even though the numbers roughly match the official numbers when they're announced