Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Hardcore players deserve one hardcore game

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.
Show only dev responses
I picked up CK1 at around 2007, and by that time I had played Medieval 2 Total War and Knights of Honor to death.
Of course, those games are pretty different from each other. Not for me though, since I looked at them as "medieval world simulators" where I could pick a historical realm, interact with other realms by various means, and simply satisfy a history nerd inside me.
(Yes, I first wanted to play M2TW because of the map, history, and interactions with that world, rather than because of battles)
CK1 was a different beast altogether. I had several friends with whom I extensively played M2TW and KoH, but only one bothered to try CK1. Gave up when his kingdom was targeted by a Crusade AND a Jihad.
The game was clunky, with some weird gameplay mechanics. And it was SO ugly, compared to games I mentioned above.
But it was an amazing game for a history nerd such as me.
I guess a "hardcore game" is something which satisfies a very specific group of people. Not really for everyone.

CK2 on the other had....wow.
Far more complex, with astounding amount of content compared to the original.
Yet it actually manages to attract people who aren't just interested in history. It attracts people beyond this "hardcore group", which played the original.

Let me repeat that again.
There is a juggernaut of a game, vastly superior in every term, including complexity and content.
And there's a game on the other hand, which is just simply a shallow predecessor in every regard.
So, the first one is "casual", since it attracts so many people, and the second one is "hardcore" because...it's not for everyone?
Well, jeez...I'll take my casual game any day.

On a side note, a question for Paradox:
Are you even aware how much pain and suffering have you unleashed with the Realm Duress mechanic in CK1?
 
sreckom92 said:
I picked up CK1 at around 2007, and by that time I had played Medieval 2 Total War and Knights of Honor to death.
Of course, those games are pretty different from each other. Not for me though, since I looked at them as "medieval world simulators" where I could pick a historical realm, interact with other realms by various means, and simply satisfy a history nerd inside me.
(Yes, I first wanted to play M2TW because of the map, history, and interactions with that world, rather than because of battles)
CK1 was a different beast altogether. I had several friends with whom I extensively played M2TW and KoH, but only one bothered to try CK1. Gave up when his kingdom was targeted by a Crusade AND a Jihad.
The game was clunky, with some weird gameplay mechanics. And it was SO ugly, compared to games I mentioned above.
But it was an amazing game for a history nerd such as me.
I guess a "hardcore game" is something which satisfies a very specific group of people. Not really for everyone.

CK2 on the other had....wow.
Far more complex, with astounding amount of content compared to the original.
Yet it actually manages to attract people who aren't just interested in history. It attracts people beyond this "hardcore group", which played the original.

Let me repeat that again.
There is a juggernaut of a game, vastly superior in every term, including complexity and content.
And there's a game on the other hand, which is just simply a shallow predecessor in every regard.
So, the first one is "casual", since it attracts so many people, and the second one is "hardcore" because...it's not for everyone?
Well, jeez...I'll take my casual game any day.

On a side note, a question for Paradox:
Are you even aware how much pain and suffering have you unleashed with the Realm Duress mechanic in CK1?
Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly. Paradox games have seriously evolved over the years. CK2 is an excellent example, it has matured massively into a fantastic game that is much smoother to play but has some serious complexity and depth to it to give longevity. Current EU4 is light years ahead of release EU4, let alone EU3 etc. Sure the argument can be made it is a little bloated at the moment, but I like the direction it is taking under Jake and I think it will just need some time for his vision to come to fruition.
 
Sourlol said:
Maybe you’re just a jaded grizzled grand strategy player who knows the correct decisions to make after thousands of hours...
Click to expand...

You make an interesting point here.

It took me a long time to get into CK2, it's my first grand strategy and there were times during the learning process I just gave up and felt totally overwhelmed by all the information and the interface.

However, once it began to click it became very easy for me to understand, and I got to a level where I know what everything does, I know how to achieve what I want to do, I know which screens to go to for the desired outcome.

I've been able to roleplay in the game because I now understand all of the mechanics, though of course it still surprises me with how they interact with each other and the outcomes, that's the game part.

So is it now casual to me because it doesn't stress me out and I just simply enjoy it and relax with it?

Is it only hardcore when I don't understand it?
 
Considering the number of aspects of the current games and the number of people requesting help and knowledge on how to play the game show that they are FAR from casual.
I believe PDX games are as hardcore as they were 20 years ago.

There are many reason to explain why some people don't feel that way. The more you play, the easier it becomes. And considering that mecanism from EU2 and EU3 are into EU4, makes you understand them instantly. Sure there are differences but by having played the previous games, you know how things are working, what to look for, how to look for things.
Overall, it's just your knowledge that you acquired during the years that make it seems easier (mostly talking about EU4 and CK2)
 
I dunno eu4 is a map painting game if you play as the ottoman ming or France but even the other great powers on very hard are quite challenging .

If anything I think eu4 needs to dial back it's variance that causes difficulty.

Oh Poland chose a local noble? There went eastern Europe, same with castile and the Iberian wedding.

And of course Austria is the worst, being even more reliant on rng, as the computer , to be a real power.

So yeah the game is too easy as France or the ottomans because your natural challenges probably will never exsist.
 
Already been said before, but I'd advise players who find eu4 (or other pdx games) to be too simple/casual to try out the multiplayer aspect of the game. I was starting to grow bored of singleplayer, checked out multiplayer, and never looked back. it's an entirely different experience, with so much more depth and so many aspects you never take into account when merely facing the ai. If you're looking for a group to play eu4, send me a pm and I can probably recommend something that suits your ambitions ^^
 
wielkiciensteam said:
I don't like for example new exploration system in EU4, where you don't even need to see where your ship is going, the system explores for you - you just need to click button and done. Yes, it is easier and feels better in gameplay, but it creates situation, where your only job is to click. click. click. that. buttons. click.
So EU has turned into clicking simulator.
Click to expand...

This is the only specific example you actually give, all the rest is just assertions you throw out into the wind and I guess expect people to nod.

So responding to this specifically... how exactly is being forced to manually click around and micromanage where your explorer fleets go 'hardcore'? Where is the deep strategic thought in clicking into fog, waiting, then clicking into fog again or back into port if your ships are too damaged... how is that 'hardcore'? Sounds to me you're just one of those people who likes to micro-manage every tiny detail and thinks that somehow makes a game more strategically fulfilling. Do you also hate sectors in Stellaris?
 
Marconius said:
wielkiciensteam said:
I don't like for example new exploration system in EU4, where you don't even need to see where your ship is going, the system explores for you - you just need to click button and done. Yes, it is easier and feels better in gameplay, but it creates situation, where your only job is to click. click. click. that. buttons. click.
So EU has turned into clicking simulator.
Click to expand...
This is the only specific example you actually give, all the rest is just assertions you throw out into the wind and I guess expect people to nod.

So responding to this specifically... how exactly is being forced to manually click around and micromanage where your explorer fleets go 'hardcore'? Where is the deep strategic thought in clicking into fog, waiting, then clicking into fog again or back into port if your ships are too damaged... how is that 'hardcore'? Sounds to me you're just one of those people who likes to micro-manage every tiny detail and thinks that somehow makes a game more strategically fulfilling. Do you also hate sectors in Stellaris?
Click to expand...

Besides of that it's even realistic just to say "Go, explore..."

Which scenario sounds more realistic:
This
"Thy majesty, I want to explore the unknown seas in the west. All I need is some money and three ships."*
"Granted"
<2 years later>
"Thy majesty, I've returned and claimed rich lands for you to exploit"
"Well done, here's your reward!"

Or this:
"Thy majesty, I want to explore the unknown seas in the west. All I need is some money and three ships."
"Granted"
<2 months later a dove comes flown into the throne room, carrying a letter>
"Thy majesty, I've just found an empty spot of ocean. How should I proceed? West, north, south, return?"
"Ehm... go west, that's what I was paying you for!"
<some time later another dove>
"Thy majesty, I've just found another empty spot of ocean. However in the West I can see shorelines. How should I proceed? West, north, south, return?"
"Go west, dammit! o_O"

*Not to be confused with "Some ships and three money"!
 
Last edited:
Eldoran said:
Sounds horrivle but i guess it begins with h too.
I mean for a mod its great same with meiou in eu4 but for base game i would consider it bad design cause. Its the same with dwarf fortress. A great game with much fun but horrible design XD

So yeah its definitivly hardcore but also tedious...i often prefer the opposite
Click to expand...

Meiou is really not that tedious and is filled with interactive systems that pretty intuitively makes sense. The first full game I played I united Ireland and built a colonial empire; I had also never played eu4 before either, so this was done with just EU3 knowledge. It really isn't that hard.

Anyways, OP, use mods. The popular ones are usually the more hard-core ones.
 
@elektrizikswerk

EU4 isn’t a simulation of the daily life of the leader. You are an omnipotent/present invisible hand taking the country where you want.

When you agreed to send the explorer, that was your hand puppeting the king. When you have to click to continue exploring, that’s your hand guiding the fear of the crew, the bravery of the captain, and all the decisions Ol’ Columbus would’ve had to have made by himself. If anything, Columbus’ decision to keep pushing West was more important to the long tail of Spanish history than the king ponying up the ships in the first place.
 
Sourlol said:
EU4 isn’t a simulation of the daily life of the leader. You are an omnipotent/present invisible hand taking the country where you want.
Click to expand...
I'd say it's both.
 
I think the biggest problem people have in this thread is that they don't understand complexity versus depth. They are not the same thing. They have a relationship, but they aren't the same thing.

Complexity is the measure of how much information you need in your head at any given time. A bad UI can multiply this to a significant degree.

Depth is the measure of the number of meaningful decisions one has available to make during gameplay.

You want as little complexity as possible for as much depth as possible. Too much complexity can actually hurt depth because too much can turn people away before they can experience the depth. If that happens the depth becomes meaningless as the potential player never experienced it.

Someone mentioned Black Ice for HOI4 and this mod is a perfect example of this issue.

I tried to get into Black Ice because I had heard how popular it was for HoI3 but I was stopped dead by how much information there was that I needed to keep straight. I went to the mod's forum, but when I mentioned this I was stonewalled by people deriding me as a casual and I received calls to "git gud".
 
"4x space games are not meant to be hardcore."

As a HARDCORE 4x/GS space fan, I can officially say you don't know a damn thing you're talking about and this shows your knowledge of the category.. Hardcore has never been exclusive to historical titles over the lifetime of the strategy genre, and you're very naive to assume so.

Plus, the entirety of the Aurora 4x hardcore community would like to have a VERY stern word with you...
 
TGK72 said:
"4x space games are not meant to be hardcore."

As a HARDCORE 4x/GS space fan, I can officially say you don't know a damn thing you're talking about and this shows your knowledge of the category.. Hardcore has never been exclusive to historical titles over the lifetime of the strategy genre, and you're very naive to assume so.

Plus, the entirety of the Aurora 4x hardcore community would like to have a VERY stern word with you...
Click to expand...
I'm just waiting on the C# version of Aroura to finally release...
 
To put my toes into the raging battle of this forum - I feel that what was PDS players call "Casual" is an impenetrable cliff of solid steel to someone who plays games like Total War or Civ. Even HOI IV the arguably least hardcore of the current generation of PDS titles is still incredibly daunting to anyone outside of our community. This is more of an hardcore or more hardcore argument. I wouldn't call any PDS game casual.
 
See my sig. Quoted in case I change it later:

"Paradox gamers are funny. They take games that need dozens of hours to learn, that they play for hundreds of hours, and they say "Oversimplified and dumbed down. No replayability value." --Panzer Commander

"We'll have people put 400+ hours into a game and then come over to the forums to decry it as "unplayable" without a hint of irony." --icedt729
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back