• 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.
Other thing to keep in mind is that a good chunk of that EU4 cost is in E-book, music packs and graphics addons. In reality their are only 15 DLC and a lot of those can be skipped without losing anything. 15 DLC over 6 years isn't bad actually.
In short with EU4, don't hit the 'complete my collection' button on Steam, or if anyone does, they should review it first and cut out the unnecessary stuff.
yup that too. But generally, to not appear biased as I mostly defend Paradox when I'm active on the Forum (unless I actively argue against them over something, for example MY SPACE UNICORNS IN STELLARIS (!!!), I did not favor Paradox in my calculation, and used ALL dlc's at their maximum price point to inflate the cost in a way. The real price to have all content, without E-Book, music packs and Digital Deluxe Upgrade is 325,74€ without sales, and that without all the unit packs there are goes down to 253,83€, still without sales. So if we did the calculation again, with Paradox being favored and removing things that add literally no gameplay elements whatsoever, the actual "time investment required" to pass The Witcher 3 in cents per hour of entertainment, is only 329.5h.
 
yup that too. But generally, to not appear biased as I mostly defend Paradox when I'm active on the Forum (unless I actively argue against them over something, for example MY SPACE UNICORNS IN STELLARIS (!!!), I did not favor Paradox in my calculation, and used ALL dlc's at their maximum price point to inflate the cost in a way. The real price to have all content, without E-Book, music packs and Digital Deluxe Upgrade is 325,74€ without sales, and that without all the unit packs there are goes down to 253,83€, still without sales. So if we did the calculation again, with Paradox being favored and removing things that add literally no gameplay elements whatsoever, the actual "time investment required" to pass The Witcher 3 in cents per hour of entertainment, is only 329.5h.
SPACE UNICORNS OR BUST
 
Disclaimer, I do not work for Paradox. That being said:

Paradox is still far from AAA. If you look at a typical AAA game at the height of its development, its usually a few hundred, over even over a thousand people working on it. As far as I've been told, at the height of development for Stellaris (?) before release, it had around 40 devs (might mix it up with EU4 or Hoi4 but im pretty sure I'm not, if any dev or support rep is willing to correct feel free to do so). For comparison, GTA V had over a thousand.


Paradox DLC policy isn't perfect. Over time, Paradox Games since the implementation of the current DLC policy will ramp up quite the cost. But, look at it objectively, taking EU4 as an example.

All of EU4 costs around 360€ without a sale, with the base game being 40€. The base game is perfectly playable and fine for casual gamers who just want to do some alt history on occasion. Those people will usually only buy a few DLCs for regions or game functions they like, such as El Dorado for the new world (my first DLC ever bought because I love the Incas).

Then theres those that invested and keep investing thousands of hours into the game, like myself nowadays - every two months or so I go into an EU4 frenzy where the only thing I do except for school is play the game. While recent DLC's have somewhat gone down in quality for eu4 as well as other Paradox Games, they have said publically that they are aware of it and want to improve on it, and also catch up on "tech debt". That is why 2019 is the year without a DLC for eu4 so to speak. Last one (Golden Century) was released last year in November, and the european expansion will be released early next year (though no exact date was given yet).

Now to look at numbers because numbers are fun and happy and don't hurt anyone. Except it's Pi or 41.8885 which I have concluded is the actual answer to life the universe and everything because Douglas Adams made a rounding error, (the golden ratio *4)² told me so. Anyway lets not get into that now. NUMBERS!

Lets look at The Witcher 3. Very well known and well received game, by one of the more revered publishers and devs remaining. On release it cost 50 or 60€ iirc (30 atm) without DLC's (now its about 60 with DLC's) but lets go with 50€ for simplicity and leniency. People take 25h (speedrun) -100h (completionist) to complete it, so lets go with 65h. So if you complete it once, you spend 77 cents per hour of entertainment. If you were to buy all of EU4 for 360€, a game that is constantly being developed 6 years after release, you would need to spend 468 hours on the game to have the same "cents per hour of entertainment" value. Which, for many active EU4 players, is very little and still considered a beginner at the game. And that is without any sale, but all DLC's bought as bulk during a non-sale period. Which, given that Paradox does -25-75% sales fairly often, is not in Paradox's favor in my calculation.


Anyway, conclusion is, Paradox DLC policy is not great, but given what they do, that they keep developing the game and add features/fix bugs years after its release, many even for free or from previous DLC content, it is very justifiable given the replayability of (most of) their games that apply this policy.

-Void

The obvious problem with comparing a company in Poland and a company in Sweden is the incredible difference of purchasing power and the cost of living.

In a ranking of the cost of living among the cities of Europe.

Stockholm is 14th
Warsaw is 83rd

CDProjekt can more easily afford that cuddly and cute PR sitting comfortably in Poland with rumors surrounding overworking their employees, a point I imagine that PDS is in a much better state in.

My advice is to just move to Poland guys, en masse.
 
Not going to go into the entire topic about being the games becoming stale or not, or the DLC model - but wanted to clear up some parts that @Duuk mentioned.
PDS is in no capacity near a AAA studio - sure, I guess we could be if we dedicated the entire studio (not talking about the publishing side here, just PDS) on just one project.

Historically, Duuk is correct, the teams were incredibly small (6-8 people), but we have grown over the years and now we average to about 15-20 people per game team (some might be slightly bigger).

And this is not counting in all the various support functions like engine and tools programmers, localisation, marketing etc.

Just wanted to clarify that.. now you may continue with the discussions ;)
 
Not going to go into the entire topic about being the games becoming stale or not, or the DLC model - but wanted to clear up some parts that @Duuk mentioned.
PDS is in no capacity near a AAA studio - sure, I guess we could be if we dedicated the entire studio (not talking about the publishing side here, just PDS) on just one project.

Historically, Duuk is correct, the teams were incredibly small (6-8 people), but we have grown over the years and now we average to about 15-20 people per game team (some might be slightly bigger).

And this is not counting in all the various support functions like engine and tools programmers, localisation, marketing etc.

Just wanted to clarify that.. now you may continue with the discussions ;)
You know, while I'm happy to be wrong, that's probably something you should never, ever have clarified, because now the forum trolls will scream "THERE ARE 20 PEOPLE WORKING ON EVERY GAME AND YOU CAN'T FIX EVERY BUG IN A SINGLE DAY WHY NOT PARADOX YOU SUK"

But you should still make sure the literally unplayable Stellaris bug in my signature gets fixed.
 
Crusader Kings 2 at release was a superior game to Crusader Kings Deus Vult. And I'm not talking only about fancy graphics and bigger scope. I mean it had more depth, and it simply had better gameplay. CK2 now is overwhelmingly superior to the original game. It's not even a contest.

I don't have all that much experience with Europa Universalis or Hearts of Iron series. However, I've played EU3 and HOI3, and while I can certainly say I had quite some fun with them, there were a whole bunch of things that bothered me about those games. EU4 at release seemed like a pretty version of EU3, with several key mechanics reworked. Some strange gameplay mechanics were removed or altered, and I was really fine with it. Game then kept growing and growing. I can't say I appreciate much the feature bloat that we have right now, or the overall direction of the game development. However, I can say how I would play EU3 now only for nostalgia, and nothing else. EU4 is far above it's predecessor. In my opinion, of course.
I liked HOI3, but it was quite a daunting experience for me to learn how to even play the game. HOI4 came in a fancy package and tried to simplify gameplay, but remain complex. I can't say I have a favorite between the two. However, with the upcoming expansion and the promised Soviet Union DLC, HOI4 is getting more and more appealing to me. Perhaps a couple of more expansions, a dose of bug fixing and AI sharpening, combined with the availability of many mods....and I'd be ready to call HOI4 a superior game to it's predecessor. Again, in my opinion.

Stellaris is a fine game. I can't compare it to any other Paradox game, so I'd have to wait for a sequel. :)
Imperator was a disappointment for me, although it was still an improvement over EU Rome.

What I'm trying to say:
I had tremendous fun with the latest sequels of popular Paradox games. i honestly believe they are all a significant improvement over their predecessors, or they have the potential to be so.
However, I do think Paradox needs to think carefully about their next steps. If Imperator is what sequels to CK2, EU4, HOI4 and Stellaris will look like, with same engine limitations, then I believe not many people will be happy. Alright, newer games are simplified in order to gain a bigger fanbase. Just watch out you don't simplify them too much, because you risk losing what made your games unique.
 
I've been saying this for a while now; what Paradox must now do is come up with an intuitive VPN or some hosting website that connects players through keywords; scheduling meetups to start and continue games games. Multiplayer is an absolute blast with the aI mostly eliminated. The people that play just need help getting organized and together. Most would gladly take over a country that was previously human-controlled, as long as they could perhaps rate the person they took over from. Ratings could then identify players based on skill etc. Now I'm riffing. but hopefully the idea is not lost.
 
Not going to go into the entire topic about being the games becoming stale or not, or the DLC model - but wanted to clear up some parts that @Duuk mentioned.
PDS is in no capacity near a AAA studio - sure, I guess we could be if we dedicated the entire studio (not talking about the publishing side here, just PDS) on just one project.

Historically, Duuk is correct, the teams were incredibly small (6-8 people), but we have grown over the years and now we average to about 15-20 people per game team (some might be slightly bigger).

And this is not counting in all the various support functions like engine and tools programmers, localisation, marketing etc.

Just wanted to clarify that.. now you may continue with the discussions ;)
Wait, you are paying people to make the localizations? I believed you used google translator or something like that. :eek:
 
I've been saying this for a while now; what Paradox must now do is come up with an intuitive VPN or some hosting website that connects players through keywords; scheduling meetups to start and continue games games. Multiplayer is an absolute blast with the aI mostly eliminated. The people that play just need help getting organized and together. Most would gladly take over a country that was previously human-controlled, as long as they could perhaps rate the person they took over from. Ratings could then identify players based on skill etc. Now I'm riffing. but hopefully the idea is not lost.
Paradox Dating is @Wiz 's secret project. It is Known.
 
I'm confused by this thread. It should be evident at this point that PDX is not for dumbing down games; on the contrary, the main problem now is that they release "base games" with very basic features and then they expand it over time. Stellaris is a prime example of PDX experimenting and making the game progressively more complex.

This however leads to two issues: someone (me included) will never ever buy a new game at full price until it gets a few DLC to make it "complete", and sometimes the changes are so radical that some people decide not to update the game anymore and are thus locked out of any subsequent expansion/DLC.

Anyway, the model works so PDX use it and allow it to keep improving its games and releasing new ones, soo.... Honestly I'm happy they rack up lots of moneys so they can keep going and giving me good games. I just have to wait a year or so until the new "Not Victoria III" is polished and has a few DLCs I can get on a sale.


You know, while I'm happy to be wrong, that's probably something you should never, ever have clarified, because now the forum trolls will scream "THERE ARE 20 PEOPLE WORKING ON EVERY GAME AND YOU CAN'T FIX EVERY BUG IN A SINGLE DAY WHY NOT PARADOX YOU SUK".

Dude.

Dude.

I get what you are saying and sometimes (well, quite often) requests are unreasonable, but a single guy in his spare time did way more to """fix""" Stellaris AI than the dev team, and ultimately they chose to collaborate directly with him to implement his changes in the base game. And that's not getting into the small bugs that are literally fixed by modifying a single .txt.
 
Dude.

Dude.

I get what you are saying and sometimes (well, quite often) requests are unreasonable, but a single guy in his spare time did way more to """fix""" Stellaris AI than the dev team, and ultimately they chose to collaborate directly with him to implement his changes in the base game. And that's not getting into the small bugs that are literally fixed by modifying a single .txt.
Called it.