3D Artwork Megathread (all discussion here please)

[Johan]

It is MUCH better to allow us to SORT them and FILTER them to get the information we want!

I suspect you will enjoy part of our UI then, as every list will be having filters, sort buttons, and a search-field.

 

[Johan]

Will there also be a proper message log and message settings like in EU4 or Vicky 2? If yes, then you have my vote of confidence!

yes ofc

 

[Johan]

We have used 3d graphics since EU3 and that will not change.

Don't you all remember these beauties?

 

[pdx-sanke]

First, I want to say that everyone is entitled to their opinion and of course we will keep an eye on any valuable feedback regarding Project Caesar as we have been doing since we started this process, but to comment on one point...

Paradox, wake up already. Imperator was a failure. Victoria 3 is a failure. CK3 is a failure. This isn't my opinion and feelings, this is what your numbers say. Or did support for Imperator stop because it was making too much money?

For Imperator, 3d characters were not at all one of the main points that caused it to not continue to receive development. People here can list probably some 10-20 points before getting into the character art.

For CK3, failure, really? I know it is a common theme to glorify CK2 in the forums, but there are no numbers that would put the games any close to each other in success, be it financial, engagement, reviews, anything. It is OK that sometimes the player sentiment in the forums (or reddit) is not necessarily shared across the entire player base of a game. The bigger our games get, the more different clusters of players we have, and we track as much as we can to make a game that everybody enjoy, but it is near impossible to satisfy 100% of people. Characters are definitely NOT a problem on CK3.

Then V3. Yeah, it is not Victoria 2 remastered. It is not a game for you if your really like the tactical aspect of little soldiers on a map, but it hardly comparable to Imperator in terms of numbers or player sentiment in the same timeline, so this "both are failure" sentiment is off. I understand there is a big division of sentiment about it, and a very engaged and negative community group especially in the forums/reddit dislike its take on the victorian setting, but I would also say that even in those groups, 3D characters is not one of their main issues they have with the game.

So I would argue that some concerns are valid, like effort needed to mod the game with the 3d characters, how they can look if not done well, maybe some potential problems with performance, etc, but there are some good benefits when it comes to immersion. And no, we do not push 3D characters to sell hats or whatever (Earth will stop moving the day business people can push anything in GSGs for the sake of making $$$).

Tinto believes this will make the game more interesting to players and is keen on taking the challenge to create engaging visuals while avoiding/minimizing the risks I mentioned above, even if characters are definitely not so upfront here as they are in the games you mentioned (sometimes I barely pay attention to the characters visuals when playing Caesar).

So again, we do value feedback, that is why we are doing this whole Tinto Talks thing, but a point just saying "I don't like it" is not super useful to us, because there are a lot of people that liked it as well, as you can check yourself on reactions to the character Tinto Talk.

 

[Johan]

You guys honestly have the patience of saints.
So from those of us how love the 3D models, thank you to the team. Please don't let the loud whining of the few stop you.
P.S. Where do we sign up for adding a DNA system and associated character models to Stellaris 2, so that I can spend all my time on an alien hybrid breeding programme.

One day I want to make a fantasy game where you can design your own chimaeara species!

 

[Johan]

Am I going crazy or did people live a completely different timeline than I did? I vividly remember the CK2 portraits being called ugly back in their day and being criticised, with players even recommending each other not to buy some of the CK2 portrait DLCs like the Byzantine Portrait Pack.

You are not crazy. They were not popular at all early on.

 

[Johan]

But how easy is it to do? Technically you can do it in CK3, it's been done by the weeb community to make anime mods.

It's a proper pain in the arse to do though, and the end result doesn't look great.

Partially because most modders dont export textured with mipmaps or manually make good ones, so when the game scales assets it looks like shit.

Its a drawback of having a scaling UI and supporting both potatos and 4k screens, and one of the two main reasons for 3d portraits. Its also a reason why many games nowadays tend to have cleaner UI, so that it can scale better without looking shit.

The other main reason for 3d portraits is that its far easier and quicker to make content, and you can have much bigger variety.

 

[pdx-sanke]

On the topic of surveys: we do regular qualitative and quantitative research about the topic and the outcome is always the same: more players prefer 3D over 2D from an immersion perspective.

Now, that does not mean it is an absolute favorite and also does not mean that people will not have issues with execution and other potential effects (more time to have mods out, performance, etc)

What I can say that, besides the visuals in character-related features that you have seen so far (and a few others that we have yet to cover) they are not as present as they are in other games like Vicky or CK3. This is not a game focused on characters or pops, they are supporting elements in Project Caesar.

 

[pdx-sanke]

I mean, not to sound like an ass, but presumably you've done the same kind of qualitative AND quantitative research for the last like 5+ years of DLCs for Hoi4 and Ck3 and the other games, so have you ever entertained the idea that there's been flaws in the research design somewhere?

We do a lot of research, yes. They do not guarantee success, but they keep us informed of trends and directions to go.

For example, HOI4 is a very good example. Since the majority of current players that are playing HOI were 14 years or younger when the game was released, should we continue to develop the game and make content in the same way as back in 2016, or is there a shift in players expectations? We do look at reviews, but we also look at other things like the amount of players playing the game, retention (pretty good indicators HOI4 has) and units sold as well (also very good). So research helps us seeing parts of the big picture, and we will definitely make mistakes, but we will be more informed.

And same thing for CK3. While the players there behave in a more similar way to Stellaris than HOI4 (so they do not stay as much around, they come and go when we have big releases), the game has continuously grown in the past years in many aspects mentioned above. While I do love CK2 as a player, CK3 has been more successful than CK2 ever was, while both games had/have their quota of good and bad releases from players perspective.

In any case, I jumped at this thread not to convince anyone that 3D > 2D (because that is not necessarily true), I just wanted to point out that "3D sucks because X is a failure" was a bad argument.