Can we expect a sunset patch on EU IV?

[Mik1984]

EU IV has been silently discontinued almost a year ago with no public communication associated with it. Now EU V has been announced, confirming all the suspicions, even though Paradox never officially admitted that EU IV has been discontinued.

Can we squeeze any public communication whatsoever from Paradox regarding the status of EU IV and perspectives on a sunset patch addressing outstanding issues with the game that have been discovered so far?

 

[ancapailldorcha]

I very much doubt it. It's been about 9 months since the last one. I'd say the team is flat out pushing for EU V to be in the best shape possible for release. There's no financial reason for them to do any thing with EU IV sadly.

 

[honkajoki]

I very much doubt it. It's been about 9 months since the last one. I'd say the team is flat out pushing for EU V to be in the best shape possible for release. There's no financial reason for them to do any thing with EU IV sadly.

There may be some financial reason. Some potential customers who are disappointed with the way they are handling EU4 can be vary of buying anything from the company, either because they fear that EU5 will at some point end up in a similar situation, or because they feel that PDX are being d*cks and do not want to give money to them.

I'm aware that the forum CoC has a No boycotts clause. I'm not calling for anything, I'm just stating the possibility that such opinions may exists. And noticing the existence of the No boycotts clause, everyone should realize that even if such opinions are not expressed here, it does not mean they do not exist. And we're back to the beginning, I think PDX may well have some financial reason to fix EU4, but either they think it's not meaningful enough, or they do not realize it due to not seeing some opinions.

 

[Mik1984]

I very much doubt it. It's been about 9 months since the last one. I'd say the team is flat out pushing for EU V to be in the best shape possible for release. There's no financial reason for them to do any thing with EU IV sadly.

Paradox products have expectations of continuous development baked into the advertised value of their products. Everyone is already accustomed for not taking these products "as is", otherwise for example the backlash against issues in Stellaris 4.0 would have been much larger, instead, everyone understands that this is an update that introduced major changes and Paradox needs time to smooth things out.

Abruptly discontinuing one of their flagship games with zero public communication, not even an official statement, is undermining that very image of continuous development.

 

[Vapiritapiri]

Hope it but doubt it. Byzantium still cannot go catholic properly.

 

[Loganplayseu4]

In all likelihood, 1.37 was the sunset patch. Still leaves a good amount of issues, but this follows the trend with previous games. AFAIK, CK2 had no announcement of discontinuation, CK3 was just announced and the only dev diary after it was the introduction of the Monarch's Journey side-quest.

From CK3's Dev Diary that started the wrap-up patches:
'In the nearest future, during the first parts of 2019, we aim to release a couple of free updates to Crusader Kings II including bug fixes, polish and some minor features not warranting their own dedicated expansions. We’ll tell you more about the first one in a few weeks. Rest assured that Crusader Kings II is still very much alive, especially with the Crusader Kings the Board Game coming up as well! Stay tuned for more news later this year!'

Safe to assume that a similar matter is occurring with EU4. There will very likely be no sunset patch.
Because we already had our sunset patch. If there were plans for any past WoC, we would have heard by now. This lines up with previous communication for Johan.

 

[Mik1984]

As far as I remember Holy Fury free expansion was released after the CK3 was announced, and numerous patches were also released even after CK3 release. So they kept resolving issues with CK2 even after CK3 was released. This is an acceptable wind down period for all people who have already purchased the game, so that they get the value for the things they already paid for. This is just Paradox paying off the implicitly assumed technical debt to the customers who were buying that product for years while expecting continuous development.

Here the situation is different, EU IV is discontinued almost a year before EU V is announced.

 

[Dunner]

There may be some financial reason. Some potential customers who are disappointed with the way they are handling EU4 can be vary of buying anything from the company, either because they fear that EU5 will at some point end up in a similar situation, or because they feel that PDX are being d*cks and do not want to give money to them.

That;'s a nice thought, but we're addicts and they know it. I doubt many players will forgo purchasing EU5 just because PDX has done a horseshit job of maintaining their product over the last year. That said, I might feel differently if I was a Mac user, the lack of attention on Mac bugs is particularly egregious.

Paradox products have expectations of continuous development baked into the advertised value of their products. Everyone is already accustomed for not taking these products "as is", otherwise for example the backlash against issues in Stellaris 4.0 would have been much larger, instead, everyone understands that this is an update that introduced major changes and Paradox needs time to smooth things out.

Abruptly discontinuing one of their flagship games with zero public communication, not even an official statement, is undermining that very image of continuous development.

I used to hold PDX in high regard for their continued maintenance of end-of-life games. Those efforts seem to have died off in the last year or two, if I had to guess I'd suspect that leadership changes in the last few years have changed the companies focus back to fatter profit margins.

I still hold out some hope that one or more of the developers will make EU4 maintenance a side project and release a patch now and then for the next year or two but I'm no longer holding my breath that we'll get any meaningful updates.

 

[Loganplayseu4]

As far as I remember Holy Fury free expansion was released after the CK3 was announced, and numerous patches were also released even after CK3 release. So they kept resolving issues with CK2 even after CK3 was released. This is an acceptable wind down period for all people who have already purchased the game, so that they get the value for the things they already paid for. This is just Paradox paying off the implicitly assumed technical debt to the customers who were buying that product for years while expecting continuous development.

Here the situation is different, EU IV is discontinued almost a year before EU V is announced.

False.
CK3 was announced on 2019-10-19. (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/an-heir-is-born.1261140/)
Holy Fury released almost a year prior on 2018-11-13.

There was 1 patch the day of the announcement (Patch 3.3), which was primarily to add their Monarch's Journey feature alongside making CK2 free.
CK3 released on 9/1/2020. There was only 3.3.3.1, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, and 3.3.5.1 afterwards, and they aren't what you'd hope for.
3.3.3.1 - Made it possible to launch the game at all on MacOS Big Sur. Only change.
3.3.4 - Adding the subscription DLC feature for CK2 (not applicable to EU4).
3.3.5 - Adding small rewards for being a subscriber for CK2 DLC after so long of being an obsolete game. Which were just key art after 45 days, a Spotify playlist after 75, and a discount on Age of Wonders III.
3.3.5.1 - Just done so that the CK2->EU4 converter worked after 3.3.5 broke it.

This doesn't read like you've interpreted it.

If we want to focus on patches just after announcement but before release:
3.3 - Day of announcement patch. Monarch's Journey feature, game made free to play. Includes some bug fixes due to adding a new feature.
3.3.1 - Same as 3.3.5.1 but for 3.3.
3.3.2 - Fixed a security issue that would allow malware execution with how Lua libraries were loaded for mods. Very obviously an exception.
3.3.3 - Fixes for Linux regarding the 3.3 content. Another security issue patch.

Out of all of these, only 3.3 proper fits your bill, and likely partially because they were adding a promotional mechanic.

It does suck, the state things are being left in (especially if you are a MacOS or Linux player!), but it is not outside the norm, and I expected this from the moment WoC was announced due to Johan's previous statements about the remaining DLC, especially once it became later apparent that literally nobody from Tinto had a hand in the development of WoC's content besides a dev's mod turned into content, implying that almost nobody remains for EU4 at Tinto.

 

[Mik1984]

That;'s a nice thought, but we're addicts and they know it. I doubt many players will forgo purchasing EU5 just because PDX has done a horseshit job of maintaining their product over the last year. That said, I might feel differently if I was a Mac user, the lack of attention on Mac bugs is particularly egregious.


I used to hold PDX in high regard for their continued maintenance of end-of-life games. Those efforts seem to have died off in the last year or two, if I had to guess I'd suspect that leadership changes in the last few years have changed the companies focus back to fatter profit margins.

I still hold out some hope that one or more of the developers will make EU4 maintenance a side project and release a patch now and then for the next year or two but I'm no longer holding my breath that we'll get any meaningful updates.

That sounds like management from a stereotypical MBA graduate in a yellow tie, who has little knowledge about the business in question, has been parachuted into managing the company and understands nothing else except line go up regarding various KPI's (Key Performance Indicators).

 

[Loganplayseu4]

That sounds like management from a stereotypical MBA graduate in a yellow tie, who has little knowledge about the business in question, has been parachuted into managing the company and understands nothing else except line go up regarding various KPI's (Key Performance Indicators).

I mean, yeah, the company went public in 2016, and the prior CEO stepped down in 2021 (followed shortly by the cancellation of 15 games to focus on 'proven niches'), so take that as you will.

 

[honkajoki]

You can call me petty or whatever for remembering things like this, but I remember.

Here's Johan saying that Middle East includes Nubia. That's one piece of content promised but not yet delivered. Here and here is something about Granada/Andalusia from Pavia.

Sure, the Granada/Andalusia thing was not a promise to do it, just a notice that they'd want to do it, but even after such wishes it would be nice to get some comment along the lines of "sorry, we won't do it".

I also remember that they can promise to tell you something, but they don't.

Hey guys! Just wanted to let you know that I've been a bit busy in the past few days with the release preparations for King of Kings, but I plan to answer questions and feedback later this week.

When someone promises something and does not deliver, it's hard to trust their further promises.

I don't really expect @Johan or @Pavia to comment on this, but I'll tag them, just so that they perhaps might read it.

 

[Mik1984]

I mean, yeah, the company went public in 2016, and the prior CEO stepped down in 2021 (followed shortly by the cancellation of 15 games to focus on 'proven niches'), so take that as you will.

Let's not catastrophize, PDX still has a decent business culture, but in general, going public for unique businesses with a unique mission has always brought a pressure away from what made them unique and so successful in the first place. They still provide a good product on the games they continue developing. (And EU IV is still a well functioning game as is, regardless of some outstanding issues that fell through the cracks)

"Going full ostrich" on an issue that they know they are being gawked at by a significant part of their core fanbase is a sign that they know if they communicated their position in any way whatsoever would make things even worse. The fact that there was no statements on this issue for almost a year, not even tangential ones, indicates not lack of interest, but a company wide gag order and public communication discipline.

It may be that somebody at PDX truly does not understand why some people feel like they owe them as one might say "a technical debt" for a discontinued game (because legally, they owe nothing) and just feel that this is "toxic fandom" that you just need to hunker down and wait them out by speaking nothing.

 

[ancapailldorcha]

There may be some financial reason. Some potential customers who are disappointed with the way they are handling EU4 can be vary of buying anything from the company, either because they fear that EU5 will at some point end up in a similar situation, or because they feel that PDX are being d*cks and do not want to give money to them.

I'm aware that the forum CoC has a No boycotts clause. I'm not calling for anything, I'm just stating the possibility that such opinions may exists. And noticing the existence of the No boycotts clause, everyone should realize that even if such opinions are not expressed here, it does not mean they do not exist. And we're back to the beginning, I think PDX may well have some financial reason to fix EU4, but either they think it's not meaningful enough, or they do not realize it due to not seeing some opinions.

CoC? What's that? Is there a no boycotting clause? That's kinda pathetic, honestly.

Anyway, if these people exist, they will be in a tiny minority. Releasing a new patch won't make Paradox any money so there's no point. This becomes much more evident when you see a prestige new project in the form of EUV about to drop.

 

[honkajoki]

CoC? What's that? Is there a no boycotting clause? That's kinda pathetic, honestly.

Forum rules, Community Code of Conduct.

Idk why it's called CoC and not CCoC.

Anyway, if these people exist, they will be in a tiny minority. Releasing a new patch won't make Paradox any money so there's no point. This becomes much more evident when you see a prestige new project in the form of EUV about to drop.

I think I exist.

When thinking whether something makes any money, there's not only the immediate consideration, does someone pay something for the fixes. There's also the consideration on how it makes the company look on longer term, which affects sales of future products. Are there not already people who are wary of PDX products due to previous problematic launches (eg Imperator, CS2) and abruptly killed products (eg Star Trek Infinite)?

 

[Mik1984]

Releasing a new patch won't make Paradox any money so there's no point.

Brand credibility and relations with core fanbase does not make any money? That is typical yellow tie thinking.

 

[Travis_Bickle]

Just want the game to work on Mac man. Let me say goodbye to the game properly, not like this.

 

[Dakka]

I think it is more frustrating on the lack of communication than a lack of patch. We are being left on "Read" regarding EU4 and I wish the devs would at least acknowledge or confirm they are done or have a final bug fix patch or... anything other than this current state of apathy

 

[ancapailldorcha]

Brand credibility and relations with core fanbase does not make any money? That is typical yellow tie thinking.

The fanbase wants EUV. That's where the money is.

 

[Mik1984]

The fanbase wants EUV. That's where the money is.

That is thinking straight from the dark age of gaming in 2000s, one broken game with flashy features following another broken game with flashy features on a "sell and forget" market. Paradox made it brand by differentiating itself from that. Not that EU IV is a broken game, far from it after years of continuous improvement, but it would benefit from a sunset patch addressing issues that have already been discovered, but no new content that can potentially introduce new issues.

Fixing issues with old games does not make a lot of money directly, but it sustains customer relations and lends credibility to every future release.