|
Why doesn't that guy just not buy the DLC?
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:01 |
|
|
Do DLCs delay the work on CK3 and EU5 ? Because both games could do with a big clean up patch, that would more or less be the next title in the series. Cleaning up all those messy patched on DLC features to make the next game.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
Well from an ethical stand point yes it kind of delays? I mean what would you think if you bought an expansion and next day we announce the sequel. EU3 and EU4 has like 3 years between them? I am not sure how it is going to end up. Right now it looks like we can keep going forever. I always joke about CK2 is going to outlive me. Groogy fucked around with this message at 07:42 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Why doesn't that guy just not buy the DLC? because there's still free features alongside with the patch that ruin the game. IE ck2's "threat" does not require dlc nor does the removal of dynastic alliances.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
Honestly the only reason I could see doing CK3 in the next few years is if there were an engine upgrade. Clausewitz as it currently is just can't really handle any more big expansion to CK2. Like adding China, which is something I always thought Pdox would do, just seems unfeasible now knowing just how much India's inclusion in the game slows things down. Barring that, I don't see a CK3 announcement coming before 2018 at the very earliest, and wouldn't be surprised if it was even later. We'll get either Vicky 3 or Rome 2 before then (one would hope).
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
Engine has nothing to do with that, that is all about how the architecture was designed in CK2 for how to handle characters/provinces etc.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
CK3 will be released when VR technology has advanced enough to allow you to personally slap any vassals that are giving you a hard time. The entire game will be spent staring at a cloth map in your courtroom.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
Tomn posted:CK3 will be released when VR technology has advanced enough to allow you to personally slap any vassals that are giving you a hard time. The entire game will be spent staring at a cloth map in your courtroom. I won't lie, if HOI5's VR option included a war room straight out of Dr. Strangelove, I would give all of my money.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
Groogy posted:I don't get what the question is? Seems more like you wanted to speak your opinion about what you think is good and bad or maybe my comprehension of the English language is just really bad (which it kinda is) So I don't think the point they're making has anything to do with the amount of development time - more the overall cohesiveness of the game systems. Compared to EU3, the biggest difference in EU4 was that mechanics which had previously not been core to the game for one reason or another, like trade, were revamped and became mechanics which shaped the flow of gameplay much more than they had previously, while features that weren't working at all (Ming factions) went away entirely. The hypothetical CK2 -> CK3 transition would then be similar; features like those introduced in Way of Life and Conclave could be made more integral and expansive since they would be base game features, while the older content like merchant republics could be updated to a higher standard as well. They were asking if you felt like CK2 was at a similar point. Not trying to complain about specific features, just using them as examples of why someone might feel that way. By the way, sorry, it has been a while since I took part in a crusade since I rarely play Christians anymore. How is the crusade resolution mechanism different from release? I'm not trying to be a jerk, it is just something that as far as I know has always worked the same: the character with the highest war contribution receives the land. It would be cool if it was more nuanced.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Tomn posted:CK3 will be released when VR technology has advanced enough to allow you to personally slap any vassals that are giving you a hard time. The entire game will be spent staring at a cloth map in your courtroom. Surely when VR has advanced enough that you can personally give her a good tumble?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
Groogy posted:We'll stop when people stop buyin it's not about being unethical, it's about trying to reinvent the wheel so much on the same game that it's simply unappealing to return. There are DLCs that are really important to buy for any kind of basic playthrough (wealth of nations, res public, art of war and common sense at the very least) and god knows what the hell you need to buy nowadays (do i need to buy the fresh new DLC to use boats like i need regarding buildings and common sense?). At this point it would be much more sensible to just make a new game since you're clearly in a mindset that is so far apart from the original idea of EU4, much like the original idea of EU4 was so far away from EU3 that it justified a new game, not another five expansions. EU4 is a great game but it wasn't an easy sale to convince people to grab it when you "just" had to buy EU4 + WN + RP + AOW + CS, now you also need cossacks, mare nostrum, horny anime portaits that unlock the royal marriage option and gently caress knows what else. They're great sales to the train simulator autists but i don't think they entice newcomers into your game.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
I bought all the mechanical DLC for EU4 and it owns
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:20
|
|
|
The only DLC for EU4 that I tell people is nearly-required is Art of War. The rest of it can be purchased later a la carte during Steam sales when they're ludicrously cheap, or not at all.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:because there's still free features alongside with the patch that ruin the game. IE ck2's "threat" does not require dlc nor does the removal of dynastic alliances. There's that patch for EU4 that changed how building slots worked so it was based on development level rather than tech, but the only way to increase development level was to have the DLC.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Mans posted:it's not about being unethical, it's about trying to reinvent the wheel so much on the same game that it's simply unappealing to return. There are DLCs that are really important to buy for any kind of basic playthrough (wealth of nations, res public, art of war and common sense at the very least) and god knows what the hell you need to buy nowadays (do i need to buy the fresh new DLC to use boats like i need regarding buildings and common sense?). At this point it would be much more sensible to just make a new game since you're clearly in a mindset that is so far apart from the original idea of EU4, much like the original idea of EU4 was so far away from EU3 that it justified a new game, not another five expansions. 
Morzhovyye fucked around with this message at 09:44 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
when you buy a strategy game you think "building buildings" won't require a dlc.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
^^^ And it doesn't, so...Stairmaster posted:because there's still free features alongside with the patch that ruin the game. IE ck2's "threat" does not require dlc nor does the removal of dynastic alliances. If you really believe Threat ruins CK it's a one line edit in defines to disable it, or you can download a mod, or you can play 2.6 when it comes out while makes it optional.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Yeah Groogs, Jazarus got me; I think that the only game that has gotten similar levels of DLC as CK2 is EU3/4 and I remember hearing how happy people were that 4 took the good parts from 3 and made them into the core while taking away the chaff. I feel like CK2 has kinda reached the point where you've gotten enough reasonably developed systems that the main problem is that they weren't developed together and so you're being somewhat constrained by older limits and they could do with being reworked from scratch, using the good ideas from CK2 as a core. (Like, all the neat things you add for mod support, what if that stuff had been there from the start?) When I played with Way of Life and Conclave, I remember thinking at the time: "This feels like stuff that was promised on the box but was never delivered quite as I expected until now" and how the game would have been much better with these as a core mechanic rather than ones added later. Favours, for instance, are a really cool and great mechanic, that could seriously be worked into something really even better to simulate just how personal poo poo was at the time and they really help get scheming back into the game and fun, because it lets you use existing systems in cool and interesting ways. The same with the focus system, where it allows for more and cooler interactions between characters, which again makes things more personal and CK2. Making things more personal is making things better; more making friends and things to do with them, more making rivals and loving with them and actually feeling like the other characters are more than just titles and numbers. That stuff, as well as cool events, is what I feel really sticks in my memory from playing CK2. Well, that and pulling of hard/ahistorical starts~ Og jeg kan ikke so godt prada svenska, so we gonna have to stick to English~ (at least until I get a few shots of akavit in me)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:15
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:^^^ And it doesn't, so...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
The game doesn't even launch if you don't have all the dlc. I mean, in a roundabout way because I just quit in disgust when I get to the main menu without all the dlc.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Groogy posted:while ck2 is closing in on 7 years.  Jesus christ have I really wasted 7 years of my life getting two centuries into the game and then restarting? This makes me feel loving old.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
No I said active development, not time it been out released. That's 4 years I think. I was actually way off, it is more close to 5 or 6 years development time. Which is like.. a third of Paradox Interactive life time if you think about it.
Groogy fucked around with this message at 13:21 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 13:17
|
|
|
I don't mind this piecemeal development tbh. DLC expansions fill in the blanks and often introduce features people asked for, patches level out balancing issues, it's all good. What I am wary of, as I feel most people are, is when blanks start turning into unnecessary bloat. That's when EU5 or CK3 need to come in. Conclave seems to be the tipping point for me, as far as CK2 is concerned. I'm not at all sold on the upcoming expansion. Not sure whether we're quite there yet with EU4, but my most recent venture into a new campaign had me scratching my head over the number of changes, good and bad, that have been introduced since the last time I've played it. Needless to say, I own all the DLC.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 13:27
|
|
|
I'm there with CK2 I think too. I bought Conclave but from what little I've played of it, it didn't seem all that fantastic (I wrapped up my first 768-1453 ironman game just before it came out and have barely touched CK2 since). I definitely don't think it's iterating for iteration's sake though.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Well, in a slightly roundabout way, there's a kind of limitation there. Development, among other things, limits the number of buildings you can have in a slot, and spending monarch points to improve province development is a DLC feature. So you can be in a situation where you can't build a building in a province because you can't develop it because you don't have the DLC. Not having that feature limits you about as much as not having the steal maps button from Mare Nostrum or Marches from Art of War. I can't believe people are still sour about it a year later.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
It's the internet, people will be sour about anything until their death bed 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Groogy posted:No I said active development, not time it been out released. That's 4 years I think. I was actually way off, it is more close to 5 or 6 years development time. Which is like.. a third of Paradox Interactive life time if you think about it. Yeah sorry I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about active development of DLC. Didn't think it was out in 2009.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
People who complain that not having the MP->province development DLC feature means you don't get buildings have obviously never played with it. You're pretty much never going to be developing your provinces so much that you get more than maybe one extra building slot, and usually that's limited to those near the threshold for a new one as well. If you were to develop your provinces that much it would be a gigantic waste of monarch power.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
idk, if you're playing as a vassal - Holland or Perm for example- then developing your provinces is a very good method of avoiding getting annexed by your overlord before you're ready to backstab them. Also without the feature <<growing tall>> is pretty much impossible.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
No you see, its actually a good thing that this DLC feature is actually useless and doesn't fit into the game because it means you don't need to buy the DLC.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
zedprime posted:No you see, its actually a good thing that this DLC feature is actually useless and doesn't fit into the game because it means you don't need to buy the DLC. damned if you do damned if you don't I guess...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
i dont know about eu4 but the things that ruined ck2 are in the patches, not the dlc
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
Haha ruined what the gently caress get some perspective.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Haha ruined what the gently caress get some perspective. Ruined is a strong word, but Im personally waiting to coalllitions and shattered retreat to be optional for going back to the game because gently caress this poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
double nine posted:damned if you do damned if you don't I guess... 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
DLC nees a NATO counter.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
I would actually like it if they went with carved medieval counters. I don't really see what the point of all these different units is when you could just have replaced them with something like a carved horse, peasant and what have you. Maybe toss some colour on it, via a banner? Like in the original Medieval: Total War, so it's as board-game like as possible.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
You could have carvings in different styles from the various parts of the world for DLC too. It'd be kind of cool, I think going whole hog into the tabletop aesthetic would work really well for Paradox games.zedprime posted:No you see, its actually a good thing that this DLC feature is actually useless and doesn't fit into the game because it means you don't need to buy the DLC. Development isn't useless (although it is very situational), it's just the argument that keeps coming up that Paradox basically ruined buildings that is dumb. You don't really get many more buildings with development than you do without. Every now and then it's useful to get the extra slot, but then so are a bunch of other DLC features locked behind a paywall. It's not like your provinces are only half as effective unless you shell out for Common Sense. Still I agree Paradox needs to take a long look at their DLC model 'cause this doesn't seem tenable indefinitely. I think EU4 will be fine through another few years of content especially if they mostly focus on flavor for the world and map rather than overhauling core systems, but the fact devs are joking about it going on forever, and that there apparently isn't any thought put into when might be a good time to end this, is a little bit worrying. Plus there's the fact that when EU5 does roll out it's probably gonna have the initial EU4 backlash of "you took out half the stuff and didn't add much" but magnified five times over since the game is just so huge there's no way a sequel can fit a lot of it in. If there's a big graphical upgrade I guess it could get away with it though. Art and graphics are still one of the big things about Paradox games that can be improved vastly, there was a big improvement between EU3 and 4 but there's still a lot of room to go and I think when Paradox has a more established art department would be a good time to jump to the next games in the series. For all the talk of Paradox vs. Creative Assembly AI and poo poo, CA loving clowns Paradox when it comes to anything visual.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
Koramei posted:You could have carvings in different styles from the various parts of the world for DLC too. It'd be kind of cool, I think going whole hog into the tabletop aesthetic would work really well for Paradox games. Yeah but remember that Paradox plays on terrain mode for some weird reason. So for us the games look like a Risk board but for them it's all mountains and forests and such.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:01 |
|
|
Koramei posted:You could have carvings in different styles from the various parts of the world for DLC too. It'd be kind of cool, I think going whole hog into the tabletop aesthetic would work really well for Paradox games. Aesthetics, sure. Clear, well defined menus and things are very important. But when a significant amount of players play with the game in political view mode anyhow, a focus on graphics is quite frankly wasted. This is one area where going stylized can pay dividends; you can absolutely substitute style and good design for greater graphical quality. I don't really care if the model soldier is so detailed that I can see his pores or that the trees in the mapmode I never use sway in the wind, but if things use clear, quality art to show things that are relevant to me, that I can appreciate. The Cheshire Cat posted:Yeah but remember that Paradox plays on terrain mode for some weird reason. So for us the games look like a Risk board but for them it's all mountains and forests and such.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:58
|
|