Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Why can't we play Muslims or pagans?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Crusader Kings II 69870 Bug Reports 19708 User Modifications 10588 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6362 After Action Reports
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
Overwhelming said:
That's not a real answer. That's like saying "you knew this game had bug "x", why did you buy it anyway?". :)

I guess Paradox has all the right to reserve that part of the gameply for a paid expansion. No need for any other excuses.
Click to expand...

It's no bug and if either of you would care to read the lengthy explanation (because the simple one didn't seem to be understood) you wouldn't be arguing over it.

I mean, why isn't bisexuality in the game if homosexuality was included ? Huh ? What about naval battles or trade goods ? There are lots of thing "missing" in the game and it doesn't make it broken/half-done or anything like it.

AND on top of that, as i understand, you CAN actually play as muslims and pagans, you just can't START as one. Peace, out.
 
"Pick a Christian lord and make sure his dynasty survives as you play a succession of his descendants through the ages" ; "Take up the Cross and fight the Moor, the Heathen and the Heretic." - From the Steam and GG pages. Seems pretty clear to me. :\

As for why they just don't tag them playable as is, it's probably because they'd feel rather half-assed lacking in events, things to do with piety, polygamy, etc. There are workarounds if you REALLY want to play them anyways.
 
rpstrategist said:
I mean, why isn't bisexuality in the game if homosexuality was included ? Huh ?
Click to expand...

Oh man, are you serious with this? Bisexuality is of no concern in this game. The fact that somebody has sexual relations with members of the same gender is frowned upon in this time, and brings the stigmata of homosexuality. People in this time did not distinguish bisexuality from homosexuality, because the only thing that mattered was sexual relations with the same gender.

Alas, the lack of naval battles is discouraging. As for the trade - it is of no concern to you, the liege. Your towns trade, not you, and they pay taxes for it.
 
Baleur said:
But what does that matter?

1. The AI plays the muslim & pagan characters.
2. The AI can wage war, defend against crusades, marry and generally do all the things the player can, the dukes and kings just have a different name to be honest..

So... Again, why can't we just play them?
"oh but they didnt have the same feudal system as Europe did in that time".
So? They do in the game, for the AI to even function... So why can't we just play it?
Or just bloody give them the same mechanics as the European kingdoms, just keeping their localized count-duke-king names (i cant remember them of the top of my head).
Why not?

Heck, just copy the pope mechanic from the christian nations and rename him, let the muslim nations go on Jihad like in Medieval 2 Total War.
Sometimes obsession with historical accuracy really dampens gameplay in a way i'm truly sad to see.

Even if we couldn't crusade, we could still do all the other fun things in the game, and using our allies to help DEFEND against the AI crusades.. Why would that be so incredibly unplayable and boring according to Paradox?
It's like saying that you shouldn't be able to play the african or native american nations in Europa Universalis because they don't have proper tech. Or that you shouldn't be able to play the uncivilized nations in Victoria 2 because they also didn't have proper tech or government options (yet).. It makes no sense..
And i must argue that the muslim/pagan nations ARE half the game. Purely based on content, they are.
By the same logic as the uncivilized nations in V2 are half the game. If i could only play as European christian nations in EU3 or V2 i frankly wouldnt have bought them.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it is just a simple text file edit, if all you want to do is play them with feudal mechanics.

I'm sure you can see why Paradox wouldn't want to put their name to something like that as a commercial product though.

Really don't understand the issue and I find it hard to believe this thread has hit 10 pages. CK2 is not like EU3, or even Victoria or HOI. You can't use it to simulate different cultures with a few modifiers and a couple of flavour events. It is a game about internal mechanics of feudal nations, so if you want to play as non-feudal ones you either have to use ridiculously incorrect feudal mechanics, or develop a whole new game to go around them.

I respect Paradox for not cheapening the subject matter by taking the first route. I hope they do the second as an expansion, it sounds really interesting. But the idea that they somehow shouldn't have released the game in its current form is foolish. I'm unsure if it is meant to be some form of political correctness, or a lack of understanding that computer games take time and money to make.
 
Well, I have just bought the game, considering the positive reviews and to support Paradox after their promies to release muslim DLC.

They say this game is "Crusader Kings" and has nothing to do with Muslim factions. This is really very absurd argument. Well, Byzantines were never "Crusaders" so they should be excluded as well because they doesn't fit to the name of the game.. Another example is already given by others : Europa Universalis III. Yeah, it is mainly based on European social-political-economical situation of the era, but still it is able to make muslim factions very enjoyable. Noone expect muslim factions in CKII to have completely new and unique gameplay, just add few important features and we will gladly accept the rest.

To Paradox : I understand you are European based company and it is quite understable for your games to be mainly euro-centric. But remember you have still a lot of customersfrom muslim world :)
 
makif130289 said:
Well, I have just bought the game, considering the positive reviews and to support Paradox after their promies to release muslim DLC.

They say this game is "Crusader Kings" and has nothing to do with Muslim factions. This is really very absurd argument. Well, Byzantines were never "Crusaders" so they should be excluded as well because they doesn't fit to the name of the game.. Another example is already given by others : Europa Universalis III. Yeah, it is mainly based on European social-political-economical situation of the era, but still it is able to make muslim factions very enjoyable. Noone expect muslim factions in CKII to have completely new and unique gameplay, just add few important features and we will gladly accept the rest.

To Paradox : I understand you are European based company and it is quite understable for your games to be mainly euro-centric. But remember you have still a lot of customersfrom muslim world :)
Click to expand...

Your argument really backward.

This is way i support paradox decision to make muslim DLC, as long as the DLC worth it and good. Even now there is plenty of people debating why the river in my province is curve not straight, imagine what will happen if paradox release crusader king with playable muslim as it is now, more people will protest that they are eurocentric, can't give justice to muslim, racist, etc2.

At least now paradox have a time to do event for muslim faction, reducing future complaint from muslim customer.
 
Dark3lf said:
Your argument really backward.

This is way i support paradox decision to make muslim DLC, as long as the DLC worth it and good. Even now there is plenty of people debating why the river in my province is curve not straight, imagine what will happen if paradox release crusader king with playable muslim as it is now, more people will protest that they are eurocentric, can't give justice to muslim, racist, etc2.

At least now paradox have a time to do event for muslim faction, reducing future complaint from muslim customer.
Click to expand...

In fact, backward argument is that "instead of releasing new muslim-pagan dlc, fix and improve what already exists". Well, problem is that these two are not substitute of each other. The game should already be improved by patches, fixes etc. Absence of muslims in a medieval era grand campaign game is a big negative. This have nothing to with muslim customers. I said Paradox remember you have muslim a lot of muslim customers because naturally, muslim customers will be main pressure group for the release of such DLC.
 
oi. it was clear _from the beginning_ that muslims are not playable. so it cant be a negative.

if you get told you WONT get something, you cant then complain about not getting it...
 
Fjoelsvider said:
oi. it was clear _from the beginning_ that muslims are not playable. so it cant be a negative.

if you get told you WONT get something, you cant then complain about not getting it...
Click to expand...

To tell it from the start doesn't make it better. Well then remove Kingdom of Jerusalem from the start then tell " I said in the beginning! ". We don't have to criticize the game within lines drawn by game developers.
 
yes you do, you dont go to rockstar or bioware and complain their titles didnt include magic the gathering, because you know... oyu wanted it in...

yes you have to compare what you get to what you got promised. if not you can just whine about everything missing something
 
Fjoelsvider said:
yes you do, you dont go to rockstar or bioware and complain their titles didnt include magic the gathering, because you know... oyu wanted it in...

yes you have to compare what you get to what you got promised. if not you can just whine about everything missing something
Click to expand...

Well, you could easily distort the subject when you wish to do so. If muslim factions in medieval era game seems to you, similar to magic the gathering in rockstar games, it is problem of your reasoning. You could still whine about this, but I am not sure if you will get any serious response.

Muslim-pagan factions in CKII is quite reasonable wish and I am happy that Paradox decided in that way.
 
makif130289 said:
In fact, backward argument is that "instead of releasing new muslim-pagan dlc, fix and improve what already exists". Well, problem is that these two are not substitute of each other. The game should already be improved by patches, fixes etc. Absence of muslims in a medieval era grand campaign game is a big negative. This have nothing to with muslim customers. I said Paradox remember you have muslim a lot of muslim customers because naturally, muslim customers will be main pressure group for the release of such DLC.
Click to expand...

First of all they said that this is game about Christian King and they promise they will release muslim DLC later, remember they have budget and deadline to fulfill, their choice is right now :
1. Let player play bland muslim faction at release and received complaint from player who fill that paradox do injustice to their area
2. Release DLC later with good playable muslim faction

I said Paradox remember you have muslim a lot of muslim customers because naturally, muslim customers will be main pressure group for the release of such DLC.
Click to expand...
This shouldn't be a problem at all because they already said that they will release it.
 
makif130289 said:
To tell it from the start doesn't make it better. Well then remove Kingdom of Jerusalem from the start then tell " I said in the beginning! ". We don't have to criticize the game within lines drawn by game developers.
Click to expand...

If the Kingdom of Jerusalem could not be modified adequately by existing mechanics, then obviously it wouldn't be playable. Just like all those Christian factions which aren't playable because they aren't feudal: republics, papacy, holy orders, bishops etc.

No one is saying that they wouldn't like to have playable Muslim nations. It would be great. I hope they do the DLC/expansion they have hinted at.

But you seem to think that the game is somehow illegitimate without playable Muslims. Despite apparently realising that a huge amount of extra work would need to go into the game to not make them just ridiculous fantasy Christians. This is silly. It's taking offence where none was meant; inventing an insult where none was intended.

If someone made a game of this quality which focussed on the Muslim world, modelling Islamic societies of the era with huge amounts of detail, would you be moaning about the lack of playable Christians? I sure as hell wouldn't, I'd just buy the thing and enjoy it for what it was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back