Seems like the release date is set by the investors (Panic post)

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

A couple of things, and this is my own opinion.

I find almost ALL "streamers" to be unwatchable as they are trying is some way to sell a product (their page). It has gotten to the point that i don't watch videos about games I like or am interested in. I miss the "good old days" or paradox actually streaming their own games, but I get it, it's cheaper to have internet people to do it.

My default take on most of the videos is, I take it with a grain of salt. Been burnt before by their wrong or embellished statements about games to sell their page for views.

In their defense I will say this (and I do agree and share your view, HOWEVER): That has happened only because up until now they have been sponsored by PDX and restricted from giving their opinion. We have see util now they have only been able to say their true opinion after the embargo has been lifted upon release. Now for the first time, they have not been sponsored and are free to give their opinion. And the consensus is very good.

Could there be some nefarious plot that behind the scenes they have made a secret deal with PDX to promote the game and lie and say it is very good and fun? Hm could be. But I see it unlikely. If it turned out to all be a lie, it would not only be a near unrecoverable loss of reputation for PDX, but for the creators as well. Would they put their reputation on the line for a bit of hype and a few views? Mmm I doubt it.

Also if you can read body language, you could already tell by the attitude of the content creators releasing gameplay before release under embargo for IR and V3 that they were not stoked. Like looking at Lambert himself, if you saw him play Victoria 3 the week before release, under an embargo to share his opinion, you could already clearly tell that he was not very keen on the videogame even without saying a word lol.

 

[bokorthedust]

I have to admit I'm rather curious why the devs seem to have decided on Ludi of all people as their main community megaphone.

Ludi aside, I'd even question why should any of them be a community megaphone. Instead of dribbling information and letting it permeate through sources like these, I'd much prefer any significant change or information announced by Johan or Pavía or any other of the devs themselves in an official setting like the forums. Otherwise we end up with threads like this one at the very least, which is just counterproductive to us players and the developers alike.

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

Ludi aside, I'd even question why should any of them be a community megaphone. Instead of dribbling information and letting it permeate through sources like these, I'd much prefer any significant change or information announced by Johan or Pavía or any other of the devs themselves in an official setting like the forums. Otherwise we end up with threads like this one at the very least, which is just counterproductive to us players and the developers alike.

It's cheap. The devs can focus on work, and the content creators act as community managers. They feed the feedback to the devs, and the feedback back the response back to the community. They dont need to spend hours reading and replying on the forums.

While I agree it is weird, I think if it was not for that new creators channels, we would no be getting anything, maybe a few weeks down the line we would get a TT with the changes and a couple of responses from Johan. At least this way we have an immediate channels and the creators dont mind spend 3 hours responding questions while the devs cannot do that.

Capitalism always finds a way to cut costs and find a more efficient way to do things

 

[Aarjalane]

Also if you can read body language, you could already tell by the attitude of the content creators releasing gameplay before release under embargo for IR and V3 that they were not stoked. Like looking at Lambert himself, if you saw him play Victoria 3 the week before release, under an embargo to share his opinion, you could already clearly tell that he was not very keen on the videogame even without saying a word lol.

I would say it was a huge mistake for PI to give unlimited access to CCs when the game is such a mess and has OBVIOUS problems.
Either they are delusional about the games polish or just don't care like with V3 and CK3. Nobody can say that CK3 and V3 launched in an acceptable state.
There is obvious deadlines enforced by stock holders.
Its fascinating to see that this magnum opus project has issues that you can spot in 2 hours of game-play that hasn't been ironed out internally before sending out test copies to people to showcase to millions of people. Market abuse, culture problems, UI and performance (The IGN video was hilarious, the guy had 10fps the whole video and like it or not they are the largest source of information for casuals, their first look of the game is a disgrace)

Mark my words the game will be out before xmas and wont look much different than what we saw, just like V3.
Im not trying to drag the game down I love every single PI game Im just frustrated at this point at a possible 4th launch in a row from a mainline title that will be a disaster (IR, CK3, V3,EU5) Im not saying those games suck now but why is it so that its a mandatory 5 years before these games become playable
Sorry Im ranting at this point and thats why I used AI in my inital post.

 

[bokorthedust]

It's cheap. The devs can focus on work, and the content creators act as community managers. They feed the feedback to the devs, and the feedback back the response back to the community. They dont need to spend hours reading and replying on the forums.

Yeah, but it's a kinda schizo feedback. Just look at this thread: a creator said something on their channel which an overeager member of the community completely misunderstood, and made a sensationalist claim that completely turned out to be false. What valuable feedback can anybody gain from interactions such as these?

Capitalism always finds a way to cut costs and find a more efficient way to do things

I mean the cheapest way would be to just let Lambert leak it I guess

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

I mean the cheapest way would be to just let Lambert leak it I guess

Truly the cheapest way would have been the leak, or if they want it to be legit, do some sort of open or semi open beta, but I guess that also has some drawdowns and you would get the same kind of schizo feedback "OMG THE UI THIS IS THE WORST GAME EVER PDX HAS DONE IT AGAIN I WILL BE GIVING IT A BAD REVIEW WHEN IT COMES OUT". or "OMG OTTOMANS ARE BROKEN IM TELLING MY WHOLE FAMILY TO BUY THE GAM EJUST TO GIVE IT A BAD REVIEW I HATE PDX THEY CANT RELEASE A PLAYABLE GAME"; not understanding that it is a beta. So I understand it

 

[bokorthedust]

Second case in point.

 

[Andrzej2]

(...)remove the divisive 3D portrait next to the flag(...) these aspects are important to many players(...)

What? It's my first time reading about it being an issue and honestly Im surprised. I like ruler's portrait next to the flag.

 

[giorgosth128]

I have to admit I'm rather curious why the devs seem to have decided on Ludi of all people as their main community megaphone. No disrespect to the guy, but he has a bit of a... history... of shall we say "embellishing the truth". His video titles are peak clickbait most of the time, and his overuse of words like "OVERPOWERED" in-video is just as cringeworthy.

I mean youtube is his job so he makes clickbait tittles to get more money. his actual videos are quite good. he also has a lot of hours in the game so he knows his stuff.

 

[NoobishHeadache]

What? It's my first time reading about it being an issue and honestly Im surprised. I like ruler's portrait next to the flag.

The 3D character models themselves have been fairly divisive to a chunk of people, so having one such model prominently displayed in one corner of the screen at all times is naturally rather unpopular with those folks. There's also a fairly solid argument to be made that it cheapens the fact that you're playing as the country, not its ruler or dynasty or what have you, if a portait of whoever is the random dude currently in charge is displayed slightly more prominently than your actual flag, which was front and center in that part of the screen in EU4.

Personally I'm ambivalent. I think it'd be fine if they just swapped the positions of the portrait and the flag, to return the latter to its former position of prominence.

 

[hjarg]

Kinda hard to take a dude who takes Aryan as his username and manages to misspell it either way seriously though.

 

[SAS]

What? It's my first time reading about it being an issue and honestly Im surprised. I like ruler's portrait next to the flag.

Yea, just because one player does not like it does not mean it is a "major issue". I personally don't like the VK3 animated leaders/general so I turn that option off.

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

Okay I have watched it. It did not seem like a joke. The developers have said it is something not easy to remove and that it would take a month. They said do you rather we spend our time doing that and delay the release for a month or spend that time maybe adding some bit more or content, or would you rather we leave it as it is for now?

I mean the choice seems obvious. If it is that difficult to remove, I dont care about it, whatever.

I am just surprised that it would take a month of work to remove an element of the UI lmao.

Maybe Ludi got confused and the devs were talking about something else like removing 3D characters entirely from the game? Dont know

 

[NoobishHeadache]

Okay I have watched it. It did not seem like a joke. The developers have said it is something not easy to remove and that it would take a month. They said do you rather we spend our time doing that and delay the release for a month or spend that time maybe adding some bit more or content, or would you rather we leave it as it is for now?

I mean the choice seems obvious. If it is that difficult to remove, I dont care about it, whatever.

I am just surprised that it would take a month of work to remove an element of the UI lmao.

Maybe Ludi got confused and the devs were talking about something else like removing 3D characters entirely from the game? Dont know

The several UI feedback threads unfolding over the past day or two certainly don't bode well if it'd take a month's delay just to change or remove a single element from the top bar...

 

[Blust]

AI message
no source

7/10 ragebait

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

The several UI feedback threads unfolding over the past day or two certainly don't bode well if it'd take a month's delay just to change or remove a single element from the top bar...

This is the problem of using hearsay as feedback channel. Ludi says in one video they are already implementing most of the UI feedback and then he says it would take a month to remove a portray. There obviously been some misunderstanding or miscommunication with the devs because that's just impossible.

 

[Thorum]

I find almost ALL "streamers" to be unwatchable as they are trying is some way to sell a product (their page).

This is probably why I stopped watching a couple of people (ludi first among those). I however disagree that it's as big of a problem as claimed, outside of sponsorships. Yes, I'd like more "little game I'm interested in" and less "similar to a popular video from a while ago", but that's more a YouTube than a creator problem...

I miss the "good old days" or paradox actually streaming their own games, but I get it, it's cheaper to have internet people to do it.

Yeah, me too. Are dev clashes really that expensive, though? I thought they were mostly stopped due to the main organiser leaving directly followed by COVID directly followed by the move to Spain?

 

[giorgosth128]

This is the problem of using hearsay as feedback channel. Ludi says in one video they are already implementing most of the UI feedback and then he says it would take a month to remove a portray. There obviously been some misunderstanding or miscommunication with the devs because that's just impossible.

I watch the stream as well. to me it seems to be more a comment about dev priorities about the Ui and the game with the budget they have. so its more likely he said that to temper the expectations. changes will come but maybe not all of them becasue devs do not have the time or money to do it.

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

I watch the stream as well. to me it seems to be more a comment about dev priorities about the Ui and the game with the budget they have. so its more likely he said that to temper the expectations. changes will come but maybe not all of them becasue devs do not have the time or money to do it.

Yeah I agree. I dont think he said anything that non of us knew. Any extra changes we asked for the game that are not really that important delays the game. We already knew that, its just common sense.

 

[Antimonum]

The 3D character models themselves have been fairly divisive to a chunk of people, so having one such model prominently displayed in one corner of the screen at all times is naturally rather unpopular with those folks. There's also a fairly solid argument to be made that it cheapens the fact that you're playing as the country, not its ruler or dynasty or what have you, if a portait of whoever is the random dude currently in charge is displayed slightly more prominently than your actual flag, which was front and center in that part of the screen in EU4.

Personally I'm ambivalent. I think it'd be fine if they just swapped the positions of the portrait and the flag, to return the latter to its former position of prominence.

The worst problem with the portrait is the lack of culture and era specific art on it, so it feels too generic and on the nose. In the latest Prussia update there was the WIP portrait of Emanuel Kant with a Shakespearian feathered cone hat on him. ERE, Serbia and Bulgaria seem to have western fashion portraits, instead of Byzantine fashion and for some of the characters we have specific distinct historical Portraits for example Ivan Alexander of Bugaria with his doubled beard