Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Has Creative Assembly taken PDX throne?

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.
Didn't TWTK just come out? Still, I'm surprised to see it getting glowing reviews even from Steam. One game does not a flagship studio make, but it looks like CA actually did dumpster Pdox on this release cycle.

Keep in mind, however, that a similar situation happened with Rome:2 vs EU 4, with the latter being more popular for good reason. CA won this one, but we'll see what happens going forward. Some of my favorite games of all time in their respective genres did not have similarly strong follow-ups.

If this weren't a monarchy, but rather a merchant republic or something then yes CA won this election.
 
I buy both, I play both. I don't play both for the same reasons, so claiming they've "taken the throne" means exactly fuck all to me.
 
CA got incredibly lazy for the past decade before 3k really. I think Thrones of Britannia flopping was their wakeup call that you can't just keep pumping out reskinned versions of essentially the same game everyone has been playing for 10+ years and expect it to do well. Given Johan's defense of IR is basically "these features were warmly received in our games 10 years ago why are they considered outdated now?!", it appears to be a parallel lesson that PDS desperately needs to learn.
 
Juboboman said:
CA got incredibly lazy for the past decade before 3k really. I think Thrones of Britannia flopping was their wakeup call that you can't just keep pumping out reskinned versions of essentially the same game everyone has been playing for 10+ years and expect it to do well. Given Johan's defense of IR is basically "these features were warmly received in our games 10 years ago why are they considered outdated now?!", it appears to be a parallel lesson that PDS desperately needs to learn.
Click to expand...
They... they don't do that? The only "new" games besides I:R have been Hearts of Iron IV and Stellaris. Hearts of Iron IV is almost nothing like Hearts of Iron III, and Stellaris is completely different from anything Paradox has done before. So I don't get where this "pumping out reskinned versions of games" is coming from when they've been doing the exact opposite, updating the same game for 7 or more years like with EU IV.
 
About CA they are set back by the engine they are using for battles, that hasn't changed since Empire total war. Considering medieval total war 2 still has the best battle experience, it says a lot. However, what CA has done is learn from their mistakes. RTW2 was a huge mess on release, and it still has some glaring issues, but after that their games seem to have been steadily improving
 
I didn't know this was 'Game of Thrones'.
Take each game on its merits. If you like it, play it. I'm sure they'll get the message.
 
Ixal said:
Just look at Dharma, the first major expansion & patch combination that did not add or alter a major mechanic of the game.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, are we saying about the same Dharma DLC? I mean, DLC which changed the very basis of government system and changed policies system as well?
 
aono said:
I'm sorry, are we saying about the same Dharma DLC? I mean, DLC which changed the very basis of government system and changed policies system as well?
Click to expand...
Not to mention made trade centers more than just good provinces...
 
Paradox games scratch a different itch than Total War games do.

They're both under the umbrella of strategy, but I only sparingly play real-time tactics games whereas I eat up whatever grand strategy game hits the market.

So it feels like apples and oranges to me. I don't think they're comparable.
 
Let me know when a CA game allows me to rule medieval Europe as an immortal satanist horse who has the pope as his lover.
 
Ixal said:
Of course there have been changes. Just look at EU4s Immersion Packs. While the idea sounded nice they have turned out to be low quality milking machines, each offering 3 useless buttons you press once and forget, a few mission trees and a few more provinces.

Especially mission trees have started to replace real content in DLC. Just look at Dharma, the first major expansion & patch combination that did not add or alter a major mechanic of the game. Instead it was just mission trees and map changes which are both easy to make. It did not even adress the big problem in India, the trading companies, but instead made them worse.
The DLC strategy from PDX over the last year took a big turn towards milking their customers with easy to make, shiny, but in the end inconsequential mini DLCs.
Click to expand...

The idea was to have smaller expansions that just add flavor and and after that larger that add more mechanics. It was supposed to adf many updates per year, but they underestimated how ithe quick releases would actually affect the content.

This works well in Stellaris, but didn't in EU4 and *gasp* the model has been changed. This year we only get one expansion, which is going to be released at the end of the year. This same less-hasty model is now present in other PDS games as well. CK2 and I:R are now also testing the concept of later updates and free updates bringing new features in meantime.

I know this can be hard to comprehend, but sometimes a business model rather than greedy, and you can't know how well it works until it has been active for a while.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion,the flavors things such as mission trees,music or units models are examples of a good features that must be in dlc.Most of the revisions mechanics must be in the base game.Stellaris has this model and it works fine in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back