Imperator: Rome - Status Update (Apr 2021)

[Hezekiah]

@Dnote Are there any plans to increase moddability for Imperator before you put out the lights?

 

[lok097]

That's really sad

 

[Zaphiron_]

I hope you'll still be enjoying I:R though

Oh yes, I will be getting my money's worth out of it for a long time to come!

 

[Kadanz]

This will sound a little odd but I do think this decision by the studio may be for the best for Imperator.

Imho titles like CK2 and EUIV had waaayyyyyyy too much DLC to the point where the games lost their focus and are currently barely recognizable from the original products. Now I know Imperator had a different life cycle and actually needed a lot of reworking post release but I do think there should be a limited number of dlc. Like after Heir of Alexander, there could be a dlc focused on each of the main culture groups and eventually one on Rome.

A game like CK2 lost its initial focus (Western style feodalism) while games like EUIV and HoI4 became convulated mess with too many side features while both were initially designed to be more streamlined experience than their predecessors. For example in HoI4 there is currently too many technologies to research while you are limited with at best 4/5 research at the same time. Ironicaly the game was precisely designed to have less research technologies than HoI3. EUIV "mana system" was actually cool and elegant on release but now there is too much side features dependant on it.

Imo CK2 had the best system early on when the game was focused on Western feodality at release and the early dlc expanded the game by allowing to play new cultures / new eras. (dlc like Sword of Islam, Legacy of Rome, The Republic). Aditionnaly I think lately the games and dlc became too similar. There is too much mana systems and mission trees.

I also get the feeling people in the studio are tired after years of post release support and DLCs but maybe I making too much guesses.

Regardless I wish the best for the teams and for the studio. Hopefully things will get better.

For a studio, IR was exactly the release you don't want to have. The game was absolutely rejected by most of its players, IR was supposed to offer something different than EU IV and CK II. But ended up being a discount frankenstein monster of both. So if there was to be a good way for IR to die it would've been back then, and hardly anyone would've cared that much.

Right now it stings quite a bit. IR has actually become a great game, it's fun and immersive (as long as you don't play tribes). It had a good dev team that interracted with us frequently and at least listened to concerns or suggestions we may have had. It was basically the only development team at paradox that did this to such an extend. Which is why said team got a lot of good faith with its rather small (comperatively speaking to other paradox titles) player base. Who would've thought that when you threat your playerbase like actual people instead of cashcows they're actually willing to stick by you?

My issues with paradox isn't their DLC policy, it's that they are putting up more walls between them and their players, which is causing me concerns that their future game releases will be completely disconnected from what their players want out of their games. As was the case with HoI 4 and IR at release imho. If you ask them they'd probably tell you that there's a lot of hate and unconstructive feedback coming their way, which in turn has an effect on their motivation as developers. I get that too.

IR has seen their fair share of bad faith actors appear on these forums. Spreading their doom and gloom, to the point it's become a meme. I think that as a community we should make more of an effort into how we deliver our feedback, we are after all still talking to human beings even if there's a screen being between us and them. Because whenever a project like IR pops up, despite its steep hills to climb, I don't think it's in our best interests as gamers and customers to allienated developers whenever they ARE actually making an effort to interract with us and listening to our ideas.

If IR has to die, then let it die with the lessons it has thought. That lesson is... Iberia is in the caucasus and not Spain.

 

[Zaphiron_]

Sad to see Imperator go, but we all know what this means!

Finally room for Vicky 3 on the center stage
LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

As much as I want Vicky 3, I don't want it at the cost of an equally good game. If that is what happened, then despite my waiting for Vicky 3 for years I won't buy it on principle. Bad business practices deserve closed wallets, not whales.

 

[n0cturn4l]

IR has seen their fair share of bad faith actors appear on these forums. Spreading their doom and gloom, to the point it's become a meme. I think that as a community we should make more of an effort into how we deliver our feedback, we are after all still talking to human beings even if there's a screen being between us and them. Because whenever a project like IR pops up, despite its steep hills to climb, I don't think it's in our best interests as gamers and customers to allienated developers whenever they ARE actually making an effort to interract with us and listening to our ideas.

Oh please, the community is fine, don't try to blame it for this backstab.

 

[Husein]

For a studio, IR was exactly the release you don't want to have. The game was absolutely rejected by most of its players, IR was supposed to offer something different than EU IV and CK II. But ended up being a discount frankenstein monster of both. So if there was to be a good way for IR to die it would've been back then, and hardly anyone would've cared that much.

Right now it stings quite a bit. IR has actually become a great game, it's fun and immersive (as long as you don't play tribes). It had a good dev team that interracted with us frequently and at least listened to concerns or suggestions we may have had. It was basically the only development team at paradox that did this to such an extend. Which is why said team got a lot of good faith with its rather small (comperatively speaking to other paradox titles) player base. Who would've thought that when you threat your playerbase like actual people instead of cashcows they're actually willing to stick by you?

My issues with paradox isn't their DLC policy, it's that they are putting up more walls between them and their players, which is causing me concerns that their future game releases will be completely disconnected from what their players want out of their games. As was the case with HoI 4 and IR at release imho. If you ask them they'd probably tell you that there's a lot of hate and unconstructive feedback coming their way, which in turn has an effect on their motivation as developers. I get that too.

IR has seen their fair share of bad faith actors appear on these forums. Spreading their doom and gloom, to the point it's become a meme. I think that as a community we should make more of an effort into how we deliver our feedback, we are after all still talking to human beings even if there's a screen being between us and them. Because whenever a project like IR pops up, despite its steep hills to climb, I don't think it's in our best interests as gamers and customers to allienated developers whenever they ARE actually making an effort to interract with us and listening to our ideas.

If IR has to die, then let it die with the lessons it has thought. That lesson is... Iberia is in the caucasus and not Spain.

People didn't behave that way until Paradox decided to ignore them constantly. Frustration tends to get to people and how they act. If Paradox doesn't react to 10 000 nice posts about getting beta testers then maybe they will notice a screaming one. IR was killed with stupid mechanics centered around "balance". God forbid a King leads an army, can you imagine that, him gaining loyalty of troops or legions. I shudder at the very imbalanced thought.

 

[Kasjodor]

Maybe my first reaction was too harsh, but please understand us, we trusted you, we are not ordinary players. We spend thousands of hours on your products, your games are big part of our life’s. Maybe sometimes we are too harsh for you guys, but that's only because we care a lot. As someone has already said here in the forum, reaction is always better than apathy. We express our appreciation in the form of purchased products, DLC and new IPs. I bought many of your products myself, I am your big supporter, I tell many of my friends about your games. However, this decision is really disturbing. It shows the great change that has occurred in Paradox and I don't know if this change is positive. You look at the statistics, forgetting the trust of your customers. And yet, acquiring a new client is much more expensive than maintaining the current one.

Your goal in mission statement - Our shared goal is to provide deep and challenging games and experiences, with hours of gameplay and endless variety, to our ever-growing community.

In your last decision you strayed from your mission. The feedback from the community about the Imperator 2.0 has been very good. The news that the game was getting better, began to spread. People started talking about it. You would see it in the statistics after a while. But more importantly - you wouldn't lose the trust of your current customer base, who buy all your games. It wasn't worth ending this game so quickly. I hope the board is wise and will rethink this decision.

Last thing - @Arheo - You and your team have done a great job, thank you very much. I hope more people like you will be working on strategy games.

 

[Dnote]

@Dnote Are there any plans to increase moddability for Imperator before you put out the lights?

I was thinking that working on mod support and quality of life improvements would be a good way to onboard a new team. But whilst I oversee the strategy games, I don't actually tell the teams what to make for each game, so we'll see what happens.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Though the mentality of not recommending a game for any reason other than "is it good or bad to play" seems weird to me.

And that's the point:

Imperator: Rome 2.0.3 is NOT a good game to play.

It's much better than any previous version, but still lacks diveristy (every nation plays the same, no extra content for many tags, cultures religions etc), many mechanics are still bad or rudimentary (trade, characters and families, diplomacy, subjects) and even the things that got reworked need more polish.

The great redeeming feature of IR until now was that the devs improved the game with every patch and reacted to feedback and suggestions.

Since you've halted development, this is gone, the game has to be judged by the current state, which is a solid foundation for more things that will never come.

 

[Kadanz]

Oh please, the community is fine, don't try to blame it for this backstab.

Never claimed such.

Anyway, moving on. I do hope that this game gets revived again in the future and this really is just a break. Doubtful, but at least there is solace in the fact that there was a group of people who really tried to keep this game alive. And I think those people can hold their heads up high.

 

[hannibal_barca]

I really hope they are working on vicky3, because that's just about the only reason i will accept for everything that's happened lately at PDS. The only game that i could call in a good state right now is stellaris (or vicky2 and ck2, but they are not in active development) which is pretty disheartening as fan of the company for years.

what makes you think Vicky 3 will be any better? I don't understand this clamour for Vicky 3 when every other release recently has been pretty much botched on release. You want a Vicky 3 that will be bare bones and take 8 years of DLC to reach its potential?

 

[Spike05]

As I said in the original post too, this decision was taken awhile ago, so it isn't a reaction to anything that has been released this year.

And THAT is exactly why people feel SCAMMED (take a look at the steam forums if you don't belive me)

Mind you, I'm not criticizing the fact that as been DECIDED to suspend IR for the lack of manpower.
That's a decision a company as the rights to make from time to time when/if situations happens (like covid)

HOWEVER no one said ONE WORD about it before 2.0 release and that IS bad practice. and WILL backfire. MASSIVELY (still take a look at what is happening on steam)

The correct way to handle this would have been alongside the patchnotes of 2.0, and on the store page.
Something like:

"2.0 is just one of the many milestones we have in mind for IR, however due to the bad situation Covid created we lack sufficient talented developers to man all of our projects. IR will receive small fix over this year, but full time developement will not resume until 2022. We are sorry about the inconvenience"

People would have liked the TRANSPARENCY of the message, and high numbers among them would have STILL brought the game or the dlcs.

Not telling anyone just to sell a few more copies is the recipe for RUING a company name.
You got away with MoTE and Sengoku because PDX was still small and niche.
I don't think people will forget this however... and reactions will not fail to show....

I'm not telling you this happly, on the contrary.

But due to this move IR WILL die... review bombing + mistrust in PDX management + forums full of "IR dead threads" WILL kill all sales for this game.

And at that point, your STACKEHOLDERD + CEO will FORBID any further developement of the title...

PS
As this will be my last post on this forum for a very long while (if ever) I wish good luck to @Arheo and the rest of the team and thank them once again for the through job they did on this title. You're the best PDS team ever!

 

[Wesum]

Never claimed such.

Anyway, moving on. I do hope that this game gets revived again in the future and this really is just a break. Doubtful, but at least there is solace in the fact that there was a group of people who really tried to keep this game alive. And I think those people can hold their heads up high.

It shouldn't be so hard to confirm wether Imperator devrlopment is gonna comeback or not, so this indicates me that in fact, is not gonna happen. If they were planning to continue after a year, I think they would be much more clearer about that fact. I can't see a multimillion public company taking decisions just thinking about the short term.

 

[hannibal_barca]

I understand that, but also we're a growing company, with a lot of active projects and sometimes you need to take a step back and re-evaluate how things are going and what you are focusing your efforts on. We want to do everything, but the reality is, we can't.

We don't even have the luxury of handing things off to other studios, we have to build those studios because very few other companies make strategy games and almost none of them make GSGs like us. These aren't FPS games where there hundreds of experienced studios waiting for work.

And based on where we are at now and what we are working on, we need the talented people that have done a great job on Imperator, to work on other projects at PDS. As I said in the original post too, this decision was taken awhile ago, so it isn't a reaction to anything that has been released this year.

Its not working dude. Don't you see the reviews on steam and the upset fan-base here? Abstract line graphs in a long table in a high-rise in Stockholm, crunching percentage growth points will not cut it man. Why is this so hard for game developing company/publisher to understand? Its not rocket science. This isn't some sheet metal mill.

 

[Wesum]

Its not working dude. Don't you see the reviews on steam and the upset fan-base here? Abstract line graphs in a long table in a high-rise in Stockholm, crunching percentage growth points will not cut it man. Why is this so hard for game developing company/publisher to understand? Its not rocket science. This isn't some sheet metal mill.

It is funny because the storytelling of "manpower problems" would make sense unless for the fact that Paradox is a multimillion company, that breaks records of profits every year and has more than 600 workers. They could just say "playerbase is not enought to support development" but that would actually contradict their brand as a company that improves the game over time to make a perfect product, and with so, their whole business model narrative.

So here we are

 

[Pardope]

Hi all, Arheo here.

As mentioned above, many of the faces you've become used to seeing in relation to Imperator will be moving on to utilise their talent in support of new projects.

2.0 was, and will remain a seminal moment in Imperator's history. The reception from the players has been overwhelming, and we are beyond proud of what the team has accomplished.

I will also be joining the team in their exodus to projects various, so I wanted to take this opportunity to thank the I:R team, our community and fans for crafting Imperator into a strong, unique element in the PDS repertoire.

I have confidence that Imperator will continue to grow towards the vision we created for it, and I will continue to be present both here and elsewhere for further conversation regarding the best PDS game

/Peter

Damn shame the game finally had potential

 

[Hezekiah]

I was thinking that working on mod support and quality of life improvements would be a good way to onboard a new team. But whilst I oversee the strategy games, I don't actually tell the teams what to make for each game, so we'll see what happens.

Thanks for the response! I hope that even if Paradox has to leave Imperator to lie, expanded modding tools will help the fans keep their game healthy in the downtime.

 

[qwertyiop]

I've seen a lot of people complaining that paradox is just doing this to get money. Yes, and?
It's a company for God's sake, not a charity to distribute grand strategy games that you have an inherent right to. They make products and if you like them, you buy them, they have no further obligation, certainly not to continue a game at their loss for the benefit of a rather small group of people who like it.​

Keep in mind that this is assuming paradox is actually killing the game, which I doubt, for if they were people would eventually discover it anyway. The backlash wouldn't be any less great, in fact it would be worse because paradox would have broken its word. It would be a lot better for them to just say now that they will not continue development on the game forever. The fact that they have not indicates that they at least plan to return to the game.

 

[stratigo]

Me too. I'll most likely pick up on a game in the future if it proves to be a smash hit, I mean, look at my badges (not that they mean much except for how many PDX games I own, and I can't even include all of them).

But I sure won't jump in at the beginning ever again as I used to do, knowing the "old" PDX paradigm of "it may not be stellar at launch, but we're sticking to it come hell or high water." My "mistake" with I:R was to upgrade to the Deluxe Edition after Marius because I thought it was proof positive that it hadn't been left for dead.

More fool I.

But, as they say, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

PDX isn't what it used to be. It's now just another Bethesda/EA/take your pick, run by bean counters who have no idea what keeps a company reputation afloat (that's why some companies are still around after a century or more and some aren't), but they DO know how to impress the board when the next quarterly is published. Good for them. They're not interested in a legacy, they're interested in immediate gain, and that's alright. Priorities differ, and there aren't any "perfect" priorities, it's all a matter of choice.

Well, PDX has chosen, and I'm not just talking about I:R here, it's been an ongoing process since, in my opinion, HoI4: "Bread and circuses".

Again, I'm not going to go into theatrics here, I might very well pick up a PDX title again in the future, and even though I'm massively disappointed with the whole debacle surrounding I:R (and a bit salty as to the fact that management made the decision to strangle it in the crib months ago without letting anybody know. To sell more copies, perhaps?), I still got my money's worth out of it.

I'm just disappointed. You're no longer the company that I once knew, the company that made me jump head first into every new project that interested me because I knew you had a passion for it and were dedicated to what you did. That bridge has been burned. From here on out it's "read reviews, wait a couple of years to see if it's still supported, THEN maybe buy it on sale."

Hope it was worth it to you, unnamed suits at the top of what used to be a very unusual, different game developing company. Not that I think you care. Should you manage to burn down this one, and I'm not saying that you will, you'll just collect your parachute and get hired by another suicidal company who doesn't know any better how to deal with vultures.

You're just more of the same now. Which is fine. It's not like there aren't a lot of you out there to choose from.

But I'll miss you. You were special. You were mighty. You were unique.

You aren't anymore.

Edit: Lest I forget, because it's really important to me that I include this: An absolute enormous thanks to @Arheo and his team. You took this game to new heights and gave me at least a couple of hundred hours of enjoyment on top of what I already had. It's a pity it had to end on this note, but I cannot possibly overstate how much it means to me and how much value it added to the game for me what you did. You guys are a crack team, and I have confidence that whatever project you get involved in, if given free hands, will VASTLY improve because of it!

Focus on quarterly gain is not alright. The focus on such gains is literally killing the planet right now. We can't just shrug every time a company decides to prioritize short term profits over long term sustainability because inevitably it hurts a lot of people.