CK3 Devs respond to BRUTAL DLC backlash
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- It has not been a good year for Crusader Kings 3 so far, and with Roads to Power on the way, there is some serious pressure on the developers to put out an expansion like Tours & Tournaments. In this video, I address some common concerns, go through the developer's response, and talk about new teasers for the upcoming expansion and where we went wrong in the first place with Legends of the Dead.
Dev Diary: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Background Footage: • CK3 Timelapse but the ...
• I left Crusader Kings ... 
Игры
Okay Paradox, it was funny the first two times with Royal Court and Legends of the Dead, but I can’t stay up until midnight editing elaborate shitposts forever.
That would imply that other dlcs were good or st least okay releases
FoI is bugged to this day where you can get a never ending cycles
Tours and tournaments is at best also mediocre, but actually not a good release
North lords is not even worth to mention, should be considered part of the base game
Lol
So pdx pulled it more than just two times lol
@@Bleilock1 I actually liked Tours. I think it provides a great platform for modders and I love how much it opens up the game to all titles. It was very refreshing after Royal Court.
I'm also partial to Fate of Iberia. Although I've criticized it in the past, the struggle mechanic was original and it made Spain much more interesting to play
FoI so far has been my favorite. I haven't really liked the content mechanics of the last dlcs/patches. @@Bleilock1
@@slip6699 doesnt change the fact its still riddled with buggs
Me first would want it to work properly
I think it was wrong how they handled the legend system. Not all legends are forgotten. Think of Robin Hood, King Arthor, Alexender the great. Heck some legends even become holidays such as Saint Patrick Day and Saint Nicolas (Dutch Holiday.) What they should have done as extra making a system that remembers the legend. For example combine it with the Tours and Tournament DLC. And at a new Contest in it, named the grand play. Giving the player bonuses on recreating that has ties to their family history. Perhaps also adding it somehow to your feast activity. That our court poet will bring forth all the legends of the world but will mostly pick that happened in your nation. Traveling Bards and Poets were the story tellers back in those days and they were the ones that spread legends and stories.
Its so unreal how paradox never takes the blame for backlash, they literally said that the main issue with LotD was “miscommunication about the scope of the dlc”.
For real, they could have described legends with all the details, it wouldn't make that feature good. I believe that people are right when they say that mods make a better use of DLC mechanics, but I have no hopes for legends, it is flawed and should have a complete rework
It frankly shows a lack of maturity and understanding of community management
That is taking responsibility. It's saying they failed to communicate.
@@unciuncia420
People aren't upset that they didn't get what they were promised. People are upset that the DLC and new mechanics in general actively make the game more annoying and tedious to play. The DLC legit makes the game worse.
"takes the blame", you take the blame for continuing to buy something you don't want, it's a great game, sorry that it can't also take your virginity at the same time, f off
My main issue with Legends is that the story each Legend tells is really similar or even almost the same as other ones. In a two-player game with a friend we and two big ai empires all had almost the exact same story in each respective Legend wich really deflated doing it at all.
I agree. Why continue to pay a small monthly fee for a legend that isn’t unique? It’s not even worth the upkeep
And the fact legend can overlap each other, really such
I really miss the Bloodlines system, it was quite unique and helped with the replayability of the game, encouraging people to try new approaches to their games in order to try to forge their bloodline. In my opinion, though I can see why some could call them "simple modifiers", they were a fitting reward for a character's journey into greatness, the best part of forging a bloodline was the fulfillment of all the conditions necessary, with the modifiers being a reward that you could maintain for the rest of the game to remember the effort you put into it. In contrast, the legends system feels like a money sinkhole whose only useful purpose is farming legitimacy (which without the dlc is a constant headache for the player)
Eh. It was too much fantasy for my taste
It's literally a pain in the butt. I started playing again and... what the heck is legitimacy and why the hell do I lose it for marriages!?! Or when a child joins the brothers in prayer. And why the hell does everyone hate me at a -40 opinion for it pretty much all through the time and how the hell can I raise it back up without fighting 100 wars, do pilgrimages and the likes. I literally don't want to be higher than a count in the early game anymore.
@@abseits_ger7274 Your right to rule. And you married a peasant probably
CK2 Bloodlines system:
>be a woman
>marry matrillineally to a male character with bloodline
>profit
I swear to god you CK2 glazers didn't play it that much
@@filip4767 I probably have over 1000 hours in ck2 and I still play it more than ck3 to this day. Its just more fun and has an actually complete and fun agot mod. Also, its way easier to mod and fix it yourself.
Their response annoyed me big time to be honest. “The problem wasn’t with our half baked unfun mechanic, we just didn’t explain it well enough to you idiots.” No, the mechanic sucked. Legends are an unhistorical generative ai textslop modifier generator and plagues are overtuned garbage. The latest dlc for CK3 have been horrible and I no longer defend it to my friends, we just play Stellaris
Stellaris has had such a great turnaround from Astral Planes, and I love that it’s still going strong nearly 10 years later
The difference in DLC between Stellaris and CKIII is insane.
The has never been a bad DLC or update to Stellaris. Some are less good than others but they are all good.
Every single DLC and major update for CKIII has made the game worse with a possible exception of Royal court which is just ok.
CKIII mods are awesome though.
@@evilemperorzurg9615I have to massively disagree with you. Stellaris dlc has also been trash on more than one occasion. There is quite a bit that isn't worth it to get even when on sale. There have also been numerous updates that have only served to make the game worse, oftentimes having most of the changes reversed in later updates. Stellar is still a decent game (not as good as it's been in the past and overly bloated now, imo), but it isn't perfect by any means.
@@DrinkyMcBeer which ones did you not like?
@@evilemperorzurg9615 nemesis was
1) reused low-poly textures for anything, even the big bad galaxy destroyer
2) absolute f ton of game breaking bugs. Some crashes today are still from nemesis features
3) the worst absolutely annoying crisis mechanic you could've come up with. Compare it with cosmogenesis, for example.
4) it's personal, but the new mechanics weren't particularly fun even on the first run. Not to mention that I've played with a "no become crisis" mod ever since, because having a random hegemony leader on the other side of the galaxy ruin your very successful lategame tech rush once was quite enough. AI tends to take the perk without any regards to ethics, which makes the most random shit suddenly get a huge game ending fleets. Not to mention that there can be several at once.
The thing with Paradox games is that it doesn't matter how bad a release is, when mods for the games are so good.
I talk about this point briefly in my last video with Invictus. Although exceptional mods are a pathway to player numbers some may consider to be… unnatural ⚡️. If the game has a poor enough performance and is cancelled too early, it is an uphill battle to develop certain assets from scratch. Paradox has always treated its modders well, but they can only do so much for cancelled games - hopefully CK3 isn’t next
Oh, if only it was that simple. The Invictus mod for Imperator is perhaps the perfect example of how mods should not be overstated as a fixes for a bad game. Even though the Invictus team do awesome work in making Imperator reasonably playable, they still can't do much about the heaps of half-baked, shortsighted, incomplete, and poorly thought out mechanics built into the game.
But there are no really good mods that warrent more than one play through
They arnt that good
@@Nunes2894 That is also another important consideration! I can't imagine having to modify plagues while dealing with that buggy release
@@Bleilock1 They are you're just baiting bro
TLDR: PDX forgot what made the CK2 great: emergent roleplaying, and all they needed to do was copy the CK2 DLC and add more depth so their autistic audience will feel challenged (yet not overwhelmed), all in the effort to create emergent roleplaying experiences, like roleplaying a doctor in a disease guessing game, similar to what people felt when diseases popped up in CK2, just with added depth.
I think the designer on CK3 doesnt understand what made CK2 and its DLCs successful and well loved. CK2 was always trying to be a simulation that focused on emergent gameplay in the form of roleplaying. It seems their focus on roleplay, while not necessarily a bad thing, it puts the designers in a bad headspace that has them focusing on all the wrong aspects of the game when designing new mechanics.
Basically the disease system should feel like a medical diagnosis minigame (that can be bypassed with having good physician who can narrow it down or if skilled enough bypass the minigame entirely with some caveats). The goal is to have so much care put into the DLC that someone actually trained in modern medicine should do better than someone not trained, but in-turn a new player can be successful through repetition and subsequent experience, or with the aforementioned Excellent Physician. If you have the player to essentially play a medical diagnosis minigame (something most players will know very little about), you dont have to worry about roleplaying because the player will be playing a role without realizing it, and that feels good for the player. This minigame doesnt have to be overly complex, but it has to have the mystery of the CK2 DLC, while having extra depth that players expect CK3 DLC to have over the CK2 DLC, and there is no better way to do that then to make a system that has the player activly caring about disease like what wouldve been the case IRL, and having good physicians should increase the players chances of success, so the player doesnt feel trapped in the minigame (if they are willing to pay the ducats for the convenience).
This is just my spitballing on the issue, probably not the best explanation but Im working off the cuff here. I do hope CK3 realizes the benefit in emergent roleplaying, and realizes that their audience is autistic enough to love what is essentially a disease guessing game (with added depth over CK2). I think players can connect with that much more than the current system, in part just because guessing the disease you have based on emergent symptoms is something all of us do to some degree, especially when we develop a sore throat lmao.
I think the developers still need to be careful on not taking a super heavy lean into specific roleplaying styles. CK2 was great because it offered a variety of different paid content tailored to different playstyles.
I teased this a tiny bit in the video, but DLC like Monks & Mystics allows players to decide if they want to play with some of the wackier elements or not. There is a colossal menu full of customization options when you first open CK2, and I think this is why it was so beloved. While the map is not generated like Stellaris, these mechanics really alter how you interact with certain gameplay elements.
I like some of your ideas, but at the same time I would also add options to play it in a more standardized manner. Players have limited bandwidth and may not always be in the mood for more fantastical elements, or vice versa.
A lot of people seem to be of the opinion that mechanics need to tie more heavily into roleplay, and I agree. You bring up an interesting point with physicians, and the game so far has done a very lackluster job with tying in character interactions to core mechanics. It may be time consuming dev wise, but I would be willing to wait far longer between releases if there was more thought put into how preexisting mechanics could be interwoven with new content - not just resources like renown and prestige (Although renown should have had a far bigger role in Legends imo)
@@4Xtraordinaire
Apologies in advance for the long-ass comment, I didnt want to oversimplify and cause the same miscommunication that my first comment seems to have done lol.
I think there is too much of an emphasis on creating a game ((everyone)) can play, It leads to trouble designing interesting gameplay loops for PDXs target audience, and thats the primary reason I think PDX is having trouble with CK3s development over something like Stellaris, who knows their target audience. PDX is trying to appeal to everyone and instead appealing to no one, and so they fail to take risks and ignore adding realistic simulation for fear of losing players, but doesn’t realize that they are losing players keeping the systems dumb-ed down like this.
But yeah I definitely didnt do the best to convey exactly the design I am thinking of (mainly because every sentence would be full of qualification and workarounds that the player can choose to increase options to deal with the system at hand, so I’ll just explain my philosophy rather than direct mechanics, or else this would be an even longer comment).
I guess my main point would be that simulation elements can help encourage roleplay through realism, and it seems the devs also realize this but seem to not be taking risks. The system should be realistic to the point that if someone is trained in modern pathology, the system should be easy for them (thus exemplifying that the simulation is realistic), but the average player, who isnt trained, should feel like interacting with the system is both fun but also allows them to use the system better with experience or educated guessing (You cant remove the 21st century modern medical knowledge from the player, so you have to play into it). For example, if a certain disease is common in the game, then a player should feel confident that those certain, common symptoms will likely (not always) yield that diagnosis; Similar to playing CK2 and having your heart sink when your character gets a headache because you don’t know if your character just has a migraine or is about to die, this is the basis for the “guessing minigame”.
The CK2 system has flaws, but the foundation is there for a system where a player can get good at guessing diagnosis to the point where they can recite Wikipedia-article-level of information on the symptoms of Diphtheria, or completely\partially bypass the guessing minigame using currency for an excellent\good physician. Ideally the minigame should be fun enough for people to want to learn atleast certain common diseases and their symptoms, but also giving the player an option to relatively ignore the system, if they can pay (or are the physician themselves). Of course the secondary nature of this system is to implement ways for players to counteract these symptoms, or even cure the diseases, based on their experience with the game or having a good physician recommending treatment automatically. Reward player engagement, but don’t punish the player for not engaging.
Regardless, there needs to be some form of engagement from the player the way Reapers Due caused when the player would drop everything to make sure their character wasn't gonna be dead in 6 months. With what we got right now seems more akin to an Ant Farm where you just kinda watch the progress of diseases and their effects on the world, with minimal engagement from the player. I believe the solution is that the gameplay loop needs to harness a degree of realistic mystery to keep player knowledge in check, versus the medieval lord they are controlling, rewarding a knowledgeable player who fully interacts with the system, while even allowing the most casual player to use a good physician to bypass most of the system with ease, but not without risk, as the convenience should come with minor drawbacks.
PDX is having trouble rectifying the depth of the systems they made in their previous games, with the ease of access to contemporary casual audiences, and unfortunately they cant seem to get that balance right and its costing them their target audience. At the very least, I think we can both agree on that.
And now they are proceeding to do the same with EU5... Like "Hey, see all this stuff that make the game cool and accessible to a lot of people, how about we remove all of this, and make it a Imperator/CK3/Vic3 clone? Our latest and greatest successes!"... I pre-ordered Imperator, and now holding for the other games to be developed and discounted long enough for them to be worth...
@@eu_maxinne wdym? what'd they say?
@@SaintRubicon I will agree that Paradox has been making wider, more broadly 'applicable' expansions unlike with CK2. I talk about this in the video, but CK2 took far bigger risks on average with mechanics like secret societies - yet they had a smaller and more dedicated community in my opinion, so they could afford to be more experimental. The point I am trying to make here is that instead of immediately pursuing 'riskier' content, they need to have a better understanding of what the community wants in the first place. Many people have aired desire for government changes - but how can you implement them without making it overly complex and confusing for newer players? I can understand being frustrated as a developer at this point, because finding compromises between certain groups of players is going to be a nightmare to begin with. Just look at all of the different ideas people have throughout my latest comments sections.
As much as there is a need for deeper and more dynamic game mechanics, I can understand why Paradox is still being conservative with some of the latest DLC they have put out. They have a great foundation, far stronger than what they started out with in CK2, but you're going to step on some toes no matter your approach. They have talked about balancing and even potentially adding more complexity to existing systems, but what that involves I do not know. In the end, it only makes sense to chase after deeper gameplay mechanics if there is a genuine desire from the community. Do most players want plagues to expand beyond what they are now, instead of focusing dev attention towards other areas, like governments? I don't know.
The main problem is lack of player interaction! I thought they learned from the success of TT expansion but they went back to ck2 style dlc where its just reacting to events and waiting. Thats not fun. Harm re duction and prevention by picking the same optimal dialogue is not fun. Do something special that actually involves some measure of gameplay, player involvement, calculation, something!
I really hope they do something interesting the historical "theme" system in the byzantine empire. Hopefully they make it actually engaging and fun instead of making them regular feudal vassals that give you 2 or 3 events as "interaction" with the player.
No the main problem is crashing for Xbox players which is half the players
@@majormarketing6552 Lmao I doubt it’s half the players
There's no way half of ck3 players are on Xbox @@majormarketing6552
When CK3 first came out, I remember defending it cause some people said it lacked content compared to CK2. I pointed out then that at launch it had a lot less content aswell and it dlc practises were not too good either. I thought then that Paradox would have learned and not make the same mistakes. It seems to me they have become either lazy or just sloppy. Also the console port is absolutely terrible and the fact that Paradox hasn’t tried to improve it themselves says enough. I love these games, poured thousands of hours in them. But as of lately I just feel underwelmed and dissapointed about the game.
Only looking at the more recent releases: Imperator was garbage, Ck3 sucked, Vicky3 sucked (Cities Skylines 2 also...). They're going to make EU5 also suck and I am going to mald so hard. I just dont see how they improve over games like EU4/Hoi4 with how poor the modern successors have been. This also may just be a personal gripe, but something about the modern Paradox map art styles just doesnt do it for me. I do believe these games will get much better over time but with their current directions, I don't see how any of their new titles surpass their predecessors.
I said it back then when ck3 was released on their forums
You didnt listen
I will say it again now
Its players like you who are at fault why games are so bad
You will uncritically defend a small indie, and throw money at them like a mad man
And only after 4 years have passes will you come to complain
If you complained right away like we did, some of this couldve been avoided
But players like you literally encourage such company behaviours and never listen/learn
Paradrones
@@rushingyew I'm hoping we're going through a punished Johan arc after Imperator's flop, but that's pure hopium on my part
I did the same and regret it.
@@rushingyewHoI4 was already a poor successor to the previous games. The game was pretty much untested when released, there were multiple duping bugs that were found out on a release date and it took 2 months to fix the most prominent ones because the dev team took a vacation. It's barely reaching the depth of vanilla HoI3 which in itself was not the greatest launch. It just sold well because they promised QoL features that would make HoI3 a bearable experience for most people.
I do want to say regarding Stellaris, that game has a *massive* advantage over the historical games. There's no requirement to satisfy historical accurace map and character wise, to simulate relatively unique historical events, or anything like that. Stellaris devs just have it much easier than the devs of the historical games.
I feel like that is also a challenge in of itself. Having to make a 4X GSG game based in space from scratch when you have little to no experience with the theme in general is a pretty big hurdle. Bear in mind that Paradox did not work on any 4X games prior to Stellaris as of my current knowledge, so the pressure to define what Stellaris was as a product must have been incredibly stressful for the developers. I believe we really saw this with the first few DLC releases like Leviathan where Stellaris was still struggling to define its image.
Games like CK3 have a preset map where they don't need to worry about system generation or performance issues nearly as much. I think a far more diplomatic take is that both games have very different challenges in how they decide to implement content, paid or otherwise.
@@4Xtraordinaire Those are mostly solvable and well understood technical issues among developers/programmers, though. Dozens of studios with less money and technical expertise have made decent space maps.
Whereas not a single developer, including Paradox, has been able to simulate the course of history without intense railroading, and they've still fallen short even with that crutch.
@@axiomsofdominion They are issues that Stellaris grappled with for quite a while, and they proved to be a recurring issue when it came time to rework core systems of the game. I don’t really think there is a significant amount games similar to Stellaris that were also a similar size and as interactive that came before 2016. I can think of Sins of a Solar Empire and Endless Space 2, but otherwise I view Stellaris as a key innovator
@@4Xtraordinaire Stellaris was weird because it was real time but there's hundreds of space 4x games out there, dozens of which are relatively recent with 2016 as a benchmark, and which are 6/10 or better games.
You don't seem to have videos for anything but like Civ 6 and Amplitude stuff plus Paradox, so I don't know how long you've been playing 4x games or how many you've played.
But there's plenty of examples of games that have comparable features to Stellaris, especially the early version prior to the travel rework.
After that of course it is a bit different because PDS likes to pile on "features" in a super messy and unintegrated way over many, many years in a way most traditional 4x developers don't do.
But none of the individual features in Stellaris are ground breaking.
@@axiomsofdominion It may simply end up being a difference of opinions. While Stellaris may not have been a masterwork out of the gate, I personally hold it in high regard over other, similar games.
I think Stellaris would have fallen into obscurity like ES2 and Sins if the developers did not aggressively rework the game from the ground up, but again, it's a matter of personal taste.
Paradox needs to actually take a step back and think what made CK3 into such a good game. They're wasting time and resources on things that we don't need. Legends are glorified money sink modifiers with auto generated text. Meanwhile modders have added fully playble blackjack.... and ARENA WHERE YOU CAN FIGHT.
Paradox should focus more on expanding warfare so it's actually more bearable. They should focus on more interaction between characters that aren't events. Diplomatic negotiations, deals, promises. On the darker side, add schemes, sabotage, espionage etc.
Instead of adding new events and some additional modifiers that barely matter.
Ck3 was never a good game
There were players like me who complained since day one
And delusional players like you who defended it under the pretense thatb"it will get better"
Now you even have memory wipe and all of the sudden "it used to be such a good game"
Can you stop defending pdx?
It was never a good game
And it didnt become a good game after 4 years
Stop shilling and buying if you want to see changes, players like you are to blame on the state of gaming industry quality
Lol
Also there is a mod that adds a WHOLE CONVERSATION SYSTEM THAT ACTUALLY ADDS MODIFIERS TO THE GAME. Like I can actually talk with my lord to buy a title off one of my fellow dukes. This is what Royal Court was meant to be.
Wait hold on, I think I missed the part where CK3 was ever a good game, because as far as I recall since release it has basically always been just a very shallow experience that despite having some good ideas never went anywhere with them and is still plagued by a spam of meaningless events (with bad writing might I add) in lieu of an actually deep gameplay.
CK3 has never actually been good, so far it has only been a pretty shallow game that has the *potential* to be good but is never taken anywhere, it's like if you have the foundation of a house but it's almost completely empty with very few rooms inside and the ones that are there lack furniture or wallpaper, but instead of working on it you just decide to focus on renovating the facade to make it as appealing as possible to onlookers who might be interested to come see it closer (the job is sloppy however)
@@sephikong8323 I think he meant ck2
@@justynajoniak6737 whats the name of the mod?
I was excited for LoD when I read what it offered. I wanted to form a norse/celtic culture and take over Britain having the legend of my house was decendent of King Arthur. It was so disappointing that legends aren't continuous for your house really felt horrible starting the legend only to have my guy die a few years later and basically lock it out for the playthrough as a failed legend. On top of that what made me quick CK3 was the plague spam 9/10 events are a plague popping up and demanding 100+ gold or you lose development. By year 1100 my empire jad under 8 development in every county and it just killed the game for me. I can't fathom why the released the dlc like this it just ruined the game for me.
Really? WIth all the busted disease recovery events I've been racing to 100 development faster than ever... even after they nerfed it, it's still way OP if you focus even a little bit on development.
not to mention that lil loss of legitimacy that makes people hate you lmao
they don't play the game I swear
@@leofwulf268 I have played 2 campaigns with the new update and if you're having trouble with legitimacy you're doing something wrong... That's not to say that I love the new DLC and all the stuff they added, but the idea behind legitimacy is going in the right direction imo, even if just to make super cheese strats less viable.
@@stephan4921 oh no no I just got lmfao'd by like 10 consecutive plagues there's literally no counterplay to that unless I cheated in that run
@@leofwulf268 Yeah, the plague frequency is busted. Though it should only give you a legitimacy hit if it started in your domain IIRC, so either you got extremely unlucky or you didn't manage it properly.
We'll make it back into the review section with this one 🗣🗣🗣🗣‼️‼️‼️❌️❌️
You have to make a video about Byzantium once the appropriate DLC comes out
It's inevitable
CK3 has failed over and over as far as deep and meaningful game mechanics. But what it *does succeed at* is creating a solid platform for dollhouse activity. That's why you see so many Sims: Medieval and Sims 4 content creators and even fans playing CK3. To these people it doesn't matter that the game has functionally 0 support for character relationships mechanically.
Yea except the game got the DM from the City council accounting department.
i just want the CK2 dlcs in ck3 and the ck2 law system. i want more roleplay and immersion
I hope there is a mod for ck2 law system
@@user-sj5wz7tt9u but i play the most time the agot mod and this dosent work
We do need a law system, but hopefully not the one in ck2. That one is completely lackluster and vassal contracts already do a better job at what it tried to do.
@@DanJuega ck2 law system is better than none
@@LunaMoon0 Lmao all the things you can do in ck2 law system you can do in ck3 with vassal contracts and centralization. Only thing missing is stuff for women’s right and by extension minorities.
For some reason they seem completely unwilling to do anything that worked in CK2. In my opinion Northern Lords was by far the best DLC that has released for CK3 (despite the fact it was limited in scope) because it followed a simple model - but one that worked. Now the devs seem obsessed with adding mechanics that don't interact with anything else, and more importantly, are just boring to use. I love CK3 and it has so much potential but at this point I don't think it will achieve it, and that disappoints me.
CK3 vanilla will never achieve it's full potential but for a while now it has become clear that CK3's greatest advantage is mods and on that matter, no matter how much Paradox messes up the mechanics they implement, mods will find a way to make them fun
Because if they do anything in CK2 the idiot fanbase would complain. If they make it similar to ck2, people get angry about buying it for ck3 and then not doing anything new, if they c hangs it substantially people will get mad about it not being as good as the system in ck2
Imo they’re leaning too far into the roleplaying aspect and by extension the ‘make your own fun’ aspect of the game.
It’s a video game, add some game lol
Actual mechanics to interact with. Modders understand this with Princes of Darkness adding coteries and extra highly expansive skill trees you can earn XP for on the side so characters are significantly more diverse and Godherja has interactable stories down well especially now they’re adding ‘end the world’ scenarios players can work towards.
I'll break from the crowd and defend the heavy lean into RP. I think this is one of CK3's strong suits, and one of the reasons why it is so different to other titles. A lot of paradox games are falling into the trap of going heavy into pop mechanics which can cause performance issues and lean into micromanagement (See: Stellaris & Sectors).
I will say that there is a cutoff limit for me personally where there is too much roleplaying expected, but it's also the heart of the game.
@@4Xtraordinaire Roleplay mechanics are nice but that’s all they’re giving us from what I can see. I’m still waiting on basic mechanics from CK2 like Republics and Nomads to get ported over.
@@pyxelknyght7149 I agree, more depth in basic mechanics like warfare and the politics between the ruler and the council would add a lot to the game. I think they went the right direction with their upcoming byzantine expansion, I'm just hoping it's good.
@@pyxelknyght7149 I wouldn't even say that Legends offered great roleplay mechanics. There are very little opportunities for character interactions and building a family history. The ideal DLC adds key features that create opportunities for more complex gameplay AND roleplay if the players want to pursue it
Roleplaying is important, but what lacks is a gameworld thats alive. Religions are static, there is no real inter vassal interaction, vassals are only thorns in your side you have to appease or humiliate instead of them being the stewards of the land you cannot control yourself. There is no real essence behind tge actions of the AI. It only reacts beside declaring war or havi g a faction.
I'm convinced the heads of these major game devs are made up of chimps in suits. These people are so out of touch with the player base that it isn't even funny. It isn't that difficult to find out what the player base wants.
They just want money. Everyone should not only leave negative reviews, but also refund/not purchase the dlc.
It isn't? Half the time the player base wants things that are in opposition to each other or have half-baked ideas with no idea how to implement or balance them.
By now I don't even take steam reviews serious anymore, because it feels like there is a hard core of people who just review negatively anyway, because they hated the last Stellaris DLC or something else.
This. We habe romaboos, weird nationalists and whatnot. Giving the masses what they want is not always the best choice. Heck. I bet those who wanted landless gameplay will be disappointed by the pdx version of it just because it wasnt possible to logically implement better in RtP.
I think also that a lot of the playbase is detached of what they want in ck3. @@HDreamer
@@elmarm.5224 I remember the glory days of debates about what culture and religion Bosnia should have...in EU3! lol
never mind that anything regarding the Balkans turns to madness anyway,but the details demanded for one single province were insane.
@@Tetragramix That's why businesses exist buddy. If you dislike capitalism, move to Venezuela
I just want Viceroy/Viceroyalties from CK2 to come back along with Tributary states.
They should just sell a "All the good CK2 features" DLC for CK3. I need my ducal dynamic crusader states back.
Tributaries would fit very well with a DLC focused on the near east/steppes akin to horse lords in my opinion. There is a lot of potential for interesting content with the mongol invasion and the conflicts that arise from it
@@4Xtraordinaire Maybe tributary was the wrong word to use I ment more like Client States where they do partially what vassals do without the risk of rebellions.
P.S I agree that the far east needs more content I literally never play over there
They've already stated that they have no intention to bring back viceroyalties. It's annoying because I want them back aswell
@GreenSkinGentleman i mean most of them wouldnt fit in the way ck3 is done which a big reason why they aren't their yet.
Also ill be honest so many of the ck2 features are so half baked and rushed like the tributaries and thats after being fixed through updates and patches.
I do wish paradox would focus on updating and bringing those back though. Hope the byzantine dlc has some of that spark
Roads to power would be like tours and tournaments it would be well received as many characters who are now unplayable would be playable
El Cid Rollo Russel Balliol and even Sir Marshal
starting as Rollo
@@jxslayz6663 Richard the Lionheart would be available.. He would be my first. Then ofcourse Rollo
I just want all the CK2 DLC's with CK3 graphics and portraits...do i ask for too much?😢
Monks & Mystics my beloved...
I actually prefer the ck2 portraits and ui. It feels more historical. Ck3 feels like a mobile game
@@tosspot1305 this!
There is really no excusing the price tag on Paradox games.
Even World of WarCraft had the sense to package earlier expansions. Even now, with all the wanton greed, you don't have to individually purchase all xpacks for WoW.
If all these games were "Buy basegame and 2 major expansions for a full game + 2 xpacks worth of content" then that would be right.
Stacking DLC upon DLC until, let me check, it costs 214€ to own the full experience? That's one querter of what I make in a month bro. Even if I made 10 times as much I wouldn't buy into this.
In fact if piracy wasn't an option and I had to chose between buying the game or not playing at all, but someone handed my 5k to spend on steam I still wouldn't buy it.
It's just ridicolous, that's what it is.
Wow wow, I really liked Royal Courts and Northern Lords DLC!
The Finals game is selling minor visual wears for $20!
We may never truly escape the consequences of priced unit packs from EU4. The game was rigged from the start
We already had those on EU3, but at least those were cheap.😢@@4Xtraordinaire
@@davincisamait was in the napoleon game too
my original purchase of the game funded the updates. I got less than I did with CK2 and that in total only cost me like 30$.
the prices of dlc in my country if horrible, its the price of a 2-3 AA game in sale...
At this point I don’t feel confident in CK3 in 2024. Playing the game is okay, but needs more work on multiple levels to feel better. Meanwhile, Stellaris just got a huge win with the latest free update and DLC. So, I’m going to wait until 2025, come back and seeing how things are going.
It's weird to me that legacy of persia and the fate for iberia didn't do to great. They've seem to be popular amongst the youtube creator community and they did what they wanted to do quite well in my opinion. Persia quickly became my favorite region to play after it's dlc came out and it even made fate of iberia better due to the overhauls to the clan government system.
Persia was criticized because it reused a lot of Iberia's features with a new splash of paint. Players were expecting most of the struggle mechanics to be spread out across a few different regions in similar conflicts for a lower price tag. There's also the discussion of inflation and 13 dollars not being enough for what you get.
The intermezzo tends to be much shorter than the struggle, and there are not as many interesting zoroastrian characters to play with in the 867 start date. CK2 got around this because of the Charlemagne DLC, which is one of the best ways to play Persia to this day imo
@@4Xtraordinaire Is everyone just playing persia just for the zoroastrians? I thought the conflict between caliphate vs non-caliphate supporters was much more interesting 😅
same, I love playing in persia with the new systems that were added!
@@senseishu937 CK3 has a very strong base of byzaboos partly due to EU4’s influence, and I feel like the desire to restore eastern rome also transfers over to post-sassanid persia
@@senseishu937 Nah I love bringing Nizarism to power since they're the specific muslim faith that have the Hashashin holy order.
I could tell how much the dlc must have under performed when the dev diary came out and they just openly tslked about the responce and issues, instead of a jokey half rp post about new features. It resembled what CA did after they set WH3 on fire last year. CA also proved that you can bring back players who are angry at you, just give them good content. I really hope they learn that the offers from current dlc is just not enough, esspecilly for the price they are demanding. Some of them have less content than free mods
4 years and there are still no conclave mechanics nor functioning crusades. Continuing to play this failed project is masochism and only feeds the delusion that someday, after you buy x dlcs it will be good like ck2. It will never be like ck2. i speak from experience, stellaris squandered its potential over the years, becoming a bloated corpse which does nothing but adding new mechanics which dont communicate with each other. Nu Paradox doesnt deserve your money, nor even your time.
Facts
True, mods community only reason to play
Stellaris still has nothing on EU4, the king of awful DLC practice
Stellaris is mostly solid imo, it’s different than the other games because of how sandboxy it is. I don’t like that new release, but frankly I can still have a lot of fun in Stellaris vanilla even today. I didn’t like some of the changes but honestly it’s not as bad as their more recent releases and it’s openness means that I can get even more play time out of mods
Fr paradox used players as a making Machine through stupid dlc models , I never bought one yet , have played eu4 and hoi4 pirated and playing ck3 now through game pass
I should’ve known something was up, the DLC bundle has been on 20% off sale for a good bit. Like I wasn’t complaining cause it gave me time to get it a wait a thought was the fairer price but I swear they had never had sales that for long for new/upcoming stuff
Hello Crusaders.
I have a small question. Did they fix the feast prestige bug? I haven’t played for a while and I don’t want to start a new game, only to stumble upon a stupid bug.
Im still waiting for Nomadic government dlc (something that should've been in the base game)
The solution is easy:
- Download the torrent version of the game
- Play the game
- If you like it, buy it
- If you don't like it don't
Internet piracy makes them money - I pirated the first one and bought the second one.
@@BrickDaniels-qu7bz I torrent every game before I buy it. If they want my money they should really earn it.
I agree with the you and the devs that CK3 needs more longevity for campaigns. All too often I quit a game at the empire stage bc it gets boring or I'm getting overwhelmed with pop ups. I think adding more late game decisions would make it more interesting. Especially for the cultures that don't get much love. Also a new notification system would be useful.
The pop ups would be alot less annoying if they were just notifications that I could open. The main issue I have with pop ups is when I'm at war I can't see shit and they can sometimes fuck over my game if I'm in 2x or 3x speed.
>Scots can diverge into Ancient Egyptian
>Egyptians/Nubians/etc CAN'T diverge into Ancient Egyptian
Legends of the Dead had the potential to be good but they took every opportunity to add meme options at the expense of more grounded parallels. Yeah, the legend of Scota is cute but the British Isles have like 9001 legends specific to it while actual geographical owners of theses cultures (trojans, egyptians, etc) can't even adopt legends native to their land and they currently have 0 legends unique to them.
They let the brits larp as the Trojans but a Carthagian/Phoenician legend is too much? Really, PDX? Really?
They didn't even add *real* fun meme legends like Lithuanian "romans".
Don’t forget about Prester John!
Well, personally, I'm still waiting for some variety in governments and gameplay.
I like a few of the new mechanics, like adventuring ... but everything else feels the same for me. On one hand, it's nice that you can play any region you like, and it is not different, but I still go back to CK2 to play as merchant republics or hordes.
Similar to ck2, the change from tribal to feudal doesn't click with me, and it's all just a drag. Also, I think that's me but on one hand CK3 feels slow, but at the same time many pointless events and popups come from all sides and flood me without any benefits or real impact of my choice ... if I have any. Sometimes I can't even differentiate quickly enough if a popup is for a plot I started on my own or something that came from another side. Technically, ck2 has the same problem, but something about ck3 UI just makes me uncomfortable.
I had the idea to retool the legends system to make it about spreadi g rumors instead. They would be like legends but negative and targeted at people. The more evidence you get, or the higher you diplomacy/intrigue the stronger the effects would become over time. It would lower general opinion, legitimacy, and may e even give people a fake trait. Like murderer. The character may not actually be a murderer, but people think they are, which is bassically the same as what currently happens in the game. I think spreading lies a out your enemies would both be funnier and more memorable than makeing a fake legend about yourself
There was a big missed opportunity to incorporate the lifestyle mechanics into how Legends function. I actually think that they could have pulled off doing more generic legends if it in turn used them as a base to build an ever-evolving dynamic tale that you customized throughout your dynasty's history.
It was an opportunity to go back and reminisce on past experiences with player characters and make campaigns memorable. What a shame
Communication was never the problem. The DLC are simply just lackluster for the most part, especially if you don't care about a region tied to a new mechanic.
The best part about CK3 is in my opinion the RP. The stories you generate and I wish they would focus much more on that. The plague gives me more "story" windows sure, but you can't really do anything about it outside of pressing 2 buttons and have the same interactions with your doktor you always had.
I want 10 more different ways for my character to find out that his wife/husband is cheating. 10 more different ways to handle my rival etc. These are just two random examples, off the top of my head, but I hope you get what I am talking about.
The biggest problem in royal Court is that every Noble had a court and the fact that you have to be a key to access it instead of the minimum being a bass is the biggest problem of royal especially since many Dukes used to call himself Kings back in the day
this along with the cities skyline and vic 3 announcements i think is evidence of a big shakeup going on behind the scenes and a serious reflection of their development process
I don't know if it's a real shakeup or just panic responses.
Stellaris continues to be the best. Not a high bar though.
Your channel is criminally underrated, you cover the news I want to hear about PDX that no other creator seems to talk about. Truely carved out your own niche and the highly produced content is great!
I really appreciate it! 💜
In short: Content creators that criticize Paradox too heavily risk being blacklisted from collaborating with them.
@@saffron1627 unfortunately, yeah
You want to know who else is to blame? You tube content creators "reviewer." Every time you watch one of these videos, they say "in partnership with paradox" or any company for that matter. These companies are paying for great reviews. This latest DLC was universally praised by You Tubers who got the "First Look" by paradox, who afterwards went radio silent, to then comeback and say it wasn't that good.
Yep i agree, why around royal court i unfollowed and stop watching all the big ck3 shilltubers
I dont have any of the DLC. Are tbey worth it? I feel as though they cant be.
DLC is now 3 times more expensive than it was just 2 or 3 years ago thanks to PDX removing regional pricing in my country, hell Millennia (a dumpster fire of a game) was literally more expensive than in the US...
I paid 18USD for Tournaments on sale and I felt scammed.
Paradox is doing this with all their games, CK3, HoI4, Cities Skylines 1&2. It's been their thing for a long long time
3:20
I want to object about the "free" content of with the culture overhaul in 1.5
Without the Royal Court DLC I can't...
- diverge my own culture
- hybradize two culteres into one
- swap out culturual traditions
- change that thingy about being "Bellicose" and so on
Heck, at release of RC, the culture overhaul meant for non-DLC owners that they were stuck with the martial tradition from the start which decided if only men, both genders or only women can be knights. So forming my own female preference religion left me with the one single choice of adding the tradition of "Warriors by Merit"...
Pointing that out back then in the "bug report section" and getting some support by forum users made them go early into non-DLC owners will have martial tradition by faith still.
I'm glad they changed that!
And yet, seeing the "cool stuff" of the culture overhaul tied behind the paywall of the DLC is wrong in my opinion!
Especially as the court itself has like absolutely nothing to do with the culture mechanics.
They could have done a better job at roping in culture to make it better connected with court mechanics, but they were probably hoping most people would be busy collecting artifacts and decking out their courts.
I think we need to know more definitively about how much freedom the developers have in pricing their content before rendering a verdict. I personally don’t have that big of an issue with the culture gatekeeping because the base game cultures are significantly changed from release, but some may disagree.
I’m more curious as to why Royal Court had such a long development process and why there is a consistent lack of QA testing throughout releases
@@4Xtraordinaire To further elaborate:
I don't own any of CK 3's DLC's.
When Northern Lords hit, I could already be very overpowered as a Norse Viking, so it didn't interest me. But Royal Court was like... so many damn dumb events, especially the infamous "Footstool event" made me avoid it, even though going nuts with cultures would had been totally my thing.
As players are still complaining to this day that they can't end the struggle in Iberia, I stay away from every DLC with the struggle mechanic.
I like to restore zoroastrian Persia and am glad the Clan mechanic was for free. But damn paradox, it's like they do it onpurpose with their DLC's so I don't have any of them.
On a sidenote:
paradox overlooks a lot from the DLC's for those, who don't have them:
- I can use a game rule for the AI about hybradizing cultures, but I don't have Royal Court
- I can set the avareg timespan in which varangians target the north sea region, but I don't have Northern lords
- I can set the appearance of the Dissolution faction for Al-Andalus, but don't have Struggle for Iberia
And without having Legends of the dead, I can by forming a new faith or reforming a pagan faith set what type of funeral I want for my religion... even though I can't hold any funeral activity at all without the DLC!
For the length in Royal court development: The (cynical) consent in the CK 3 forum was, that paradox struggled hard with those 3D models.
Boy, for a game I could rant a lot about... I still have over 3.000 hours playtime in it... god damn paradox and making my home region not only a county including my small home town, but also a starting point for either a historical or custom char in 867!!!!!!
I myself have unfollowed every single content creator that makes Paradox content. Most of them are liars and hypocrites. Taking sponsors deals and proceed to lie about said sponsor being good or bad. If there are any negative comments, they delete them.
I have avoided taking sponsorships thus far and the only reason I would consider changing my stance would be if it was unrelated to the product I’m playing or talking about. There is a massive conflict of interest when it comes to reviewing content for a company that you have a contract with, which is why I have relied purely on money from the RUclips partner program
@@4Xtraordinaire I understand and respect that. Although, I am NOT saying content creators should never take sponsors, you should. But stay honest ffs... F.e. One Proud Bavarian kept deleting my comments. I called him out about not being honest in sponsored videos. Its disgusting really.
I stopped watching One Proud Bavarian after his Victoria 3 pre-release video where he broke the game while simultaneously going on and on about how great it was.
@@KitteridgeStudios I left the community when Chapter 3 of CK3 was announced and every yt kept saying how great it was. Yeah, sure... Paying 50 bucks for features that the game should have from launch.
As a ck3 player who only really has the base game (I’ve only bought the Viking DLC) I’d say the DLC’s are ill received because most of their contents are just things that should’ve been in the base game already. I can understand having stuff like cults, more unique interactions, and or clothing choices being DLC, but having what should be base game features in a medieval game like having a court, unique events like tournaments and custom feasts, or culture mergers is just stupid especially in a bad economy like we have now. If it was 10 dollars per DLC I could understand but there’s no way that I’m paying 20+ dollars for something that is neither expansive nor justifiable as not being a base game feature. Stuff like the Byzantines not having having an imperial system and not being able to play as republics is just stupid and either shows a lack of though or time that went into the game’s initial development. I’ve played a few mods and I don’t really see a justification for why most of this stuff wasn’t either base game material or released as non dlc. Something I’d absolutely pay for is a map expansion to Asia, more events like uniting the North Sea empire that actually feel rewarding, or even more horde invasions. Just giving us what we already should’ve had just feels greedy and lazy especially when moders casually do more in a few months than paradox has done in years. At the end of the day I just want to role play so the upcoming dlc seems promising since unlanded characters seems both expansive and as something that the base game shouldn’t have. It seems like a true dlc as long as paradox doesn’t botch it.
I think a separate game focused on Asia would make more sense as opposed to adding even more regions east of India. There are already enough areas of the game that need to be developed, and east asia would just be adding fuel to the fire
The multiple succession options is huge, completely transforms the game! Now I can give up the throne without feeling like I've been robbed because a shitty character I don't want to play is set to inherit. I feel it allows me to play much more organically and explore more, and is likely to see me finish CK3 games to end date
I think the longest Dynasty i have played was like 200 years. I also play much more role play style.
I also hope that you will be able to play a republic as landless gameplay.
if RoP goes badly, I don't think I will buy a chapter of Crusader kings 3 anymore. Up until now I have trusted and received stuff of little value, I only save TaT for me the only decent DLC released. I open a discussion on paradox's philosophy of putting the real content in the free patches, I'm pleased that those who can't afford or don't want to buy certain DLCs get some content, but I find it frustrating that those who pay don't get anything important by paying LoD I got "legends" meh much worse than bloodlines and black plague "wow". I think it's thanks to us consumers that people who don't pay can enjoy these substantial free patches and I think we consumers deserve even more content than the little we receive compared to what we pay. sorry for the bad English this message was written using google translator, greetings from Italy
Last time i play was in Tours and Tournament but yeah i did had a full playthrough. Basicly the experience are how your retinue could be stat stacked enough to defeat enemy very large levy in late game or making enough money to sustain your own very large levy.
My feeling on CK3 have been put on halt because my laptop will be cooked if i play more of them. I wait until Republic or Nomad.
How about charging $15 for a South America DLC where half of the focus tree is copy and pasted from one country to another? Paraguay, Brazil, Argentina and Chile all have the exact same military tree.
Given their track record over the past 5 or so years, why would we give them the benefit of the doubt?
More often than not they miss, and often badly.
Because Paradox has had far more consistent titles like Stellaris, and the developers have shown that they can put out a good expansion (Tours & Tournaments). Unfortunately, Crusader Kings is the only game on the market like this at the moment as far as I know, and CK2 was great
In CK3 the only game I ever did from 867 all the way to end date was a matriarchal coptic Nubia game. I still have notes of every character and a small summary of what they did. But aside from that I still find myself going back to CK2 cause it's just that good. I wish CK3 gets its act together cause it obviously has the potential to be better but I'm not hoping much tbh.
Tbh, I find that dev diaries should really be more like diaries. Weekly updates and in-sights into the development of the game and the people behind it.
Not only frequently coming up advertisment texts, when a new dlc is coming up.
Nice background music
I think the main problem of the games isn't lack flavor or roles play but how easy is the game as old CK 2 players I think they should focus on making more realistic and harder I want to loss the game be beat down lose
I never make it very far in my games, typically because things get stable and there isn't much to do. But conquerors sounds good, I've been using the mod Historic Invasions which is the same thing essentially. That's really what I wish there was more of: an actual historic narrative that you get to be apart of. Basically the reason why I kept playing CK2 with HIP for a loooooong time after ck3 came out. Making it to endgame would be awesome if the world genuinely changed in an at least semi historical manner. Right now YOU the player have to MAKE the AI recreate history yourself, by intervening and funding it (have to get another mod to let you join all the wars, haha).
Holding jousts on cooldown is too much event spam to begin with.
The army AI is still lacking. Your allies randomly splitting from the army group just to pluck up daisies in regions around is so infuriating to me. To the point I don't even start wars if I can't win with my troops only. And I miss the vassal casus beli from the ck2. In ck2 if an enemy attacked your vassal, not just you as a liege, but that vassal also took arms to defend his own lands. I miss that logical step in defense. The republic states are still unplayable, I know they will dlc it eventually, but we all know this game will be unfinished even in 2034. Also, the piety and prestige resources are underimplemented, give me somewhere to spend them. As a tribal lord, I can spend the prestige but even that comes to a halt at some point, and piety is just massing up if you don't want to constantly create new religions. I do like Legends of the dead though, the plague/disease spreading mechanic is actually great.
Isn't it crazy that it took Paradox until now to add message settings, something that CK2 has on release more than a decade ago?
I think one thing we need to acknowledge is that almost every major paradox dlc across their games change the gameplays completely. It’s almost like a completely different game from what was originally released. Look at EU4 from the beginning till now. After all these years, there’s so much content and the entire gameplay has changed. I’m happy buying a new dlc every year rather than a new game completely
This holds true only for EUIV and Stellaris tbh. And those in fact are the most successful games atm (aside HOI4 which has a completely different foundation though)
to be clear - they said estates were available to all characters living in an administrative government type realm, not all characters in general.
The free update of legends gave practically full plague mechanics (or enough to feel playable) which I am happy with as the legends mechanics locked behind a pay wall don’t seem worth it
Paradox is also notoriously bad at QoL improvements of the interface. It is crazy that you still cannot filter court invitation by acceptance for example.
bros unlocked the algorithm with the ck3 content
keep it coming btw i love it
The main point of CK2 was always that it was a 4x/grand strategy game, but deeper.
It had all the layers of a regular game, with conquest, alliances, CBs, military compositions, tactics, terrain, etc...
But it had one additional layer of depth and strategy that other games didn't, with the management of dynasties, relationships, vassals, having enemies within and without your kingdom you should be weary of.
Ck3 made a game that's supposed to be a greater grand strategy game, and made it, somehow, lesser, hell, it's turning into a visual novel at this point.
how dare you describe my cdk3 family loop-da-loops so perfect at 4:22
I feel like Paradox is expecting the player to roleplay being a medieval run of the mill ruler and they design the game along those scales. But then the player decides to conquer all of Europe and the Middle East in one lifetime and then rightfully expects to be remembered as Alexander the Great Reborn, which the game doesn't do.
There has always been a disconnect between the actions of the player and the reaction of the game (even in CK2) and I don't know if Paradox is even interested in fixing that because it would require them to modify their vision for the game.
I want more start dates, because I don’t like the current ones. I would like a 1204 or 1081 one, were Byzantium is in trouble. The updates make mods have a hard time to adapt, so having the devs making the start dates is best.
"DLC's are necessary to have consistent and good free updates to the game"
It baffles me that us paradox players have been brainwashed to believe in a lie such as this. No, a game does not need more than a 100 dollar's worth of DLC's just so the developers feel incentivized to keep updating the game. CK3 is not an old game, it's still very much relevant to the paradox (and the broader gaming) community so they'll always keep updating the game to retain their player base and to attract newer people.
If they got rid of their predatory DLC programme and released most of the stuff they're planning to add to the game for free, CK3 would become way more popular as a result. There are so many people that (rightully, I might add) don't buy Crusader Kings 3 because they don't want to play a bare bones game for 50 (or 20 if on sale) dollars. It's time we stop accepting such pathetic excuses like this.
Are there? The numbers are probably hard to get.
Maybe it's just me remembering when a game was released and never even got bugfixes back in the day, but Developers updating a game is not a given.
i started with ck3 as my first paradox game but ive been playing ck2 now its awesome
I'm starting to feel paradox as a whole has become a kitchen with 8 cooking stations having 20 cooks and they all blame the bus boy for their low quality food that they spent 3/4th of the time arguing over it's preparation
Make the flavor DLC's 5.99 and the big ones 9.99 we won't complain as much. I've spent thousands of my dollars on Paradox throughout my life and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth when we get a 30$ addon that gives us... crickets - when we all know we can play these for free and effectively collapse Paradox if we wanted to. At what point does the fan base just say enough already we've been had too many times. cough Victoria 3 cough
Funny thing is, the flavour DLC were 5,99€ for CK3. The retroactively increased the prizing (shortly before Friends and Foes was announced) because supposedly they were worth so much more money.
Im enjoy the content of ck3. Of course new dlc is always met with back lash and its up to the dev to talk with their community and work it out.
For me its all the busywork, all they're doing is adding buttons to click that don't manifest significant changes in the experience. I cringe and screech with stress when i have to go through and refill all my courtiers, and legitimacy and legends feel just like more additions to that long list of chores that get in the way, not add.
Me on console still struggling to even get into the traditions tab: 😔
I'm still waiting for a diplomatic mapmode that allows me to see my allies and enemies while in multiple wars 😊
Still the biggest problem with ck3 stays the same even after all dlc....every county is equal to play, map painting through conquests (and some inheritance)
(Then i wanna ask, does the IA have the stationing bonuses for it MAA? Because soo often my maa are enough to win a war with somebody with more/better maa and levies like their maa have no modifiers)
Adding new start dates is a must. Constantly dealing with the same scenario is boring. England in both start dates is an immediate annoyance cause you have no time to prepare for the onslaught. France is bordergore central. Which i feel adds to people always playing in the same areas.
Start a game. Let it run for an hour. Hop in and choose realms in an interesting position.
I think dlc is expensive I still bought it but I would expect more for the price. Because dlc barely is released each year. Like only 3-4 a year.
I think Legends can take a hint from Bloodlines, because CK2 always did a good job with balancing the fantastical elements and the more medieval elements and when you played CK2 so much more existed, I think Legends needed to honestly be part of a later DLC with combat being a big part of a DLC before then as fighting to the death and being a great fighter should be something which allows you to create a Legend and thus that Legend will give you modifiers like Future house members have a higher chance of gaining high prowess traits and high Martial traits. I will say Minigames don't really belong in Crusader Kings, it should very much still be a bit RNG heavy because the RNG of Crusader Kings II allowed every playthrough to feel different. Crusader Kings III on the other hand, a lot of the leaders do feel too similar because lifestyle events are always very similar. Although I will say CK2 is a lot harder than CK3 ever was.
CK2 still rules the games!
Sometimes I wish Paradox would go back to the good ol' Expansion packs time. This live service thing where they must decide what is free and what is paid....in the end will never top actual expansions, where they would have the freedom to complete change the game if the want to and not having to worry to keep a barebones vanilla version up to date.
sigh.
Even the so called free culture addition had the tools to access it locked behind a dlc.
Hi not sure if you heard but console ck3 is being developed by dragons lake studio now instead of lab 42
Thank you for updating me! I’ve been very slow to check on console updates, but I hope things start to turn around
In Johan we trust
Sadly ck3, cs2, v3, millenia, stellaris(star trek), and recently hoi4 (they're keeping it afloat with free weekends) have all fallen victim to paradox's 'these dumbassess are eating up anything we throw at them' strategy
All we can do is pray and cope that they don't kneecap Johan
I personally have given up on paradox altogether because they sell you the promise of a good game and to say that they under deliver would be an understatement. It doesn't help that they're basically alienating the people that brought them here
>[company] releases a unique thing
>people like it because its authentic
>[oh its popular globally]
>[thing] starts being made with a more globalized audience in mind
>original fans lose interests because it no longer feels like the older [thing]
>[thing] stops attracting new people because it lost all of its character in the process of making it 'more palatable for newcomers'
>[company]: 'where money?'
$30 for a dlc is criminal. Especially when we get such a small amount of content for the price. You could buy Subnautica, Dave the Diver, Satisfactory, Stardew Valley, Foxhole, They are Billions, Regiments, Myth of Empires, and Pacific Drive each for $30 or less.
You forgetting that we on Console are far behind with dlc still dosent have have any sort of update if gonna even get seson 2 at all.
Its because there wasnt enough in the base game on release and they are releasing all these DLC's but they also havnt got enough content.
If people can remember the last year of CK2 they were releasing free updates that actually improve the game maybe these updates didnt have enough content but with how many updates there were during that 1 year it made it worth it, whereas CK3 we are lucky if we get 2 major DLC's and 2 major updates a year, meanwhile modders are making whole DLC Sized mods and others feel like a new game LOTR and GOT for example, im not saying the devs dont work hard but other game devs seem to be more involved with their game with more frequent updates, i feel like the devs of CK3 dont even know their own game or playerbase or where its going.
I liked the culture merging system, to bad I cant use it without paying
also they added it to the starter kit but im not paying $60 twice so once more its them trying to suck money from me for things that should be in base game
The notion of adding filler mechanics and text walls in order to not disrupt the "sandbox" exoirience is faulty.
People play a computer game to have a challenge, paradix game specifically to chalkenge their idea of a cool alt-history with the game .
The mechanics should reflect these chalenges and unexpected burdens and reward you if you make it trough .
Mechanics like stress forve you to act in accordance to the traits the descendants you raised have .
TT forces you to plan your trips and not teleport .
Thats what makes them great
I had to rewind a couple times to make sure I heard that right. The Grand Strategy Incest genre lmao
To be honest after a game with my in friend in wich I had plague debuffs for almost the whole game. I will never play without disabeling plaugues via mod ever again.
my biggest problem is that after finishing a legend, the create legend artifact doesnt work, as well as the diseases ruins the game as you every year almost you have to go into hiding due to some bs
Ok I didn't know ck2 dlc was sooooo good! Holy cow! I hope that gets a new gen update.
Maybe I'm part of the minority but I play with the goal of unlocking specific achievements. I look at something like 'Beta Israel', check what else I can pick up along the way and that's it. Once I get the achievements, that's the end of that run. It means I do end up playing all over the map and can balance my time between easy achievements and very hard runs
I actually wanted an earlier start date 😅
They should have kept the fantasy elements in tbh. It's part of the reason why I play CK2 more (8.8k hours and counting) than CK3 (1k hours) to this day. Well...that and the mods. I'm sure if the landless DLC is great, then the current game and mods will feel a hell of a lot better. TBH, the only reason I'm even playing CK3 right now is because After the End mod is so good and goofy. CK3 needs to bring back some of the goofyness tbh. I miss Glitterhoof Empires :(
Also, I would have preferred 1081 Alexiad in addition to the 1178. That was always a classic start date.
Man its still crazy to me that they decided it was a good idea to take Ck3 in a different direction from CK2.
Everyone wanted Ck3 to be CK2 but with improved mechanics and expanded systems. Instead they just ignore everything and give us this shit.