Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Excited but...

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Crusader Kings III 20781 Console 343 Suggestions 6259 Bug Report 4883 Tech Support 2627 User Mods 1960 Multiplayer 170 AARs (After Action Reports) MP Open Beta Feedback 27
Sinister2202

Sinister2202

Most Honorable Dwamak
7 Badges
Aug 12, 2009
2.650
1.950
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
I feel like it's gonna suck. Feels like yet another platform for dozens of DLCs. I haven't even got any of CK2 DLCs yet, and boy am I glad not investing on CK2, when CK3 has been announced, despite the fact that I think it's going to suck. It's going to be all bones and no meat at release, and they will slowly make the game better with updates and DLCs. Obvious attempt to milk it. I don't blame them.

It's just that I am very confused as to what manner of "more improvements" the franchise can possibly get, on top of CK2 with all the DLCs. Graphics? Bettter UI or details, or perhaps some sort of revolutionary way of dealing with events? Better game engine? Future map expansion DLCs? :confused:
 
Feelings without evidence are worth very little.

At this juncture there is nothing rational about making any kind of broad assumption about how the game is going to turn out, we simply don't know.

Furthermore, your view that they can't possibly add anything to CK3 just shows a startling lack of perspective, I assure you that CK2 was not a perfect and all-encompassing simulator of medieval politics. There is almost certainly more they can add, and unlike with DLC making a new game means that their budget is comparatively larger and thus they can afford to include more comprehensive changes. CK3 might be good, it might be bad, but it definitely doesn't need to be the same.

Frankly, I think you just need to wait for the devs to reveal the changes and then judge them. Because right now these assumptions are hardly very productive.
 
Fourthspartan56 said:
Feelings without evidence are worth very little.

At this juncture there is nothing rational about making any kind of broad assumption about how the game is going to turn out, we simply don't know.

Furthermore, your view that they can't possibly add anything to CK3 just shows a startling lack of perspective, I assure you that CK2 was not a perfect and all-encompassing simulator of medieval politics. There is almost certainly more they can add, and unlike with DLC making a new game means that their budget is comparatively larger and thus they can afford to include more comprehensive changes. CK3 might be good, it might be bad, but it definitely doesn't need to be the same.

Frankly, I think you just need to wait for the devs to reveal the changes and then judge them. Because right now these assumptions are hardly very productive.
Click to expand...

All of this. CK2 is far from a perfect game, but it's been groaning under its own weight for years. CK3 may be terrible, but starting from the ground up allows the devs to apply what they've learned since CK2 came out without the burden of existing code limiting their options.

Sinister2202, if you're wondering what improvements could be made, I suggest checking one of the threads where people discuss what they'd like to see in CK3.
 
One of the most important things is that they'll be using a new game engine which will be able to do a lot more than CK2's engine...
 
BrokenSky said:
They're probably worth a lot to whosoever's managing the pre-release advertising and community development.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but since none of us are community managers that's not especially compelling.
 
Fourthspartan56 said:
Perhaps, but since none of us are community managers that's not especially compelling.
Click to expand...

True. To be fair though, if you wanted a community manager to read a comment, this'd be the place to put it : P
 
Sinister2202 said:
It's going to be all bones and no meat at release
Click to expand...
I'm not exactly sure where this attitude is coming from but I'm seeing it all over the place lately, most likely from the people who've only become aware of these games in the past few years. As someone who played EUIV on release, that game didn't feel like things were purposefully removed so they could be sold to you later. Things like Art of War feel like an integral part of the game sure, but before Art of War, it wasn't like the game didn't have war in it it's just that war was a boring slog where you had to occupy every province (which all had forts mind you) to get the 2 or 3 provinces you wanted, Paradox wasn't hiding Art of War in their back pocket waiting for the opportunity to sell it to people.

Now, CK2 might seem like features were purposefully removed since in the base game you can only ever play as Christian rulers, and Republics are completely unplayable until you look back at CK1 and realize that was a legacy feature. Yeah, it sucks you have to pay more to play as most of the characters in the game but that's more a problem with Paradox not realizing just how big they were going to make CK2.

I just really don't like this attitude that Paradox is purposefully stripping features from their games in order to sell them to people, it's clearly created by ignorance of the Dev Diaries, as well as the previous states of the games, granted I don't believe Paradox is innocent; it IS their fault for their really skeevy DLC policy albeit they seem to be getting better, at it's absolute WORST they were putting out CK2 and EUIV expansions within months of each other, it was insane, some of which promised to add "lots of features" most of which wound up becoming obsolete because of future expansions or barely change anything, so some DLC's only wind up adding about 1 relevant feature to future releases. (*Cough* Res Publica, *Cough* Cossacks, *Cough* Monks and Mystics, *Coughs up blood and a lung* AMERICAN DREAM)

I won't even hold Imperator against Paradox for now seeing as how they are as we speak making the game better for free, but if CK3 is a repeat of that disaster I will probably not be touching another new Paradox GSG unless a friend can convince me otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back