This is not a rant nor a review, but simply, the opinion of a long time fan, about CK3 after playing 6 campaigns since release. First of all, I am a big fan of CK2, it is probably one of my favorite games of all time. I bought CK2 when Sons of Abraham just came out so I don't know what its state was at release, but I was always impressed by how each playthrough was so unique. No matter who you played, there was always a good story waiting for you mixed with interesting strategic challenges. It is one of those games that even after 1000 hours still surprises you.
I have always been reluctant to post my thoughts on CK3, because PDX games are huge and it's difficult to immediately express your thoughts about it. I however like to say that I'm a bit disappointed with how CK3 turned out, and it went in a direction that doesn't really suit me. The only real improvement in CK3 in my opinion are the 3D portraits. These simply look amazing and it is impressive how a random character generator is able to spawn, realistic-looking characters that all look unique. They also significantly help the role-playing aspect of the game. Sadly I can't say the same for the map graphics and interface, which both look very bland.
Sadly I feel that there isn't a 'game' anymore around these RPG mechanics. People keep praising CK3 for the role-playing, but it always felt restricted in the form of random events. Frankly, I think random events should be a 'nice-to-have' and not the backbone of the game. Random events are extremely limited, they feel forced and they get old very quickly. I just don't get excited by reading the same thing 5 times. To be fair CK2 also suffered from this but there were still a lot of interesting strategic challenges to overcome, so the game remained interesting. The role-playing aspects gave context to your campaign, but they weren't the reason why I played a campaign. I don't feel like I am playing a game anymore about managing my kingdom where stories form dynamically. I feel now that I'm playing a game where a story is generated through random events.
You may be puzzled because the mechanics present in CK2 are still in CK3, but they have all been streamlined so much that there not very interesting anymore. Warfare has become incredibly easy once you understand the skill trees. Not only is the rally system a huge downgrade, but it is way too easy to overpower everyone in the game. If you understand you know that is now very easy to form alliances and abuse mercenaries due to stewardship and diplomacy skill trees. I never felt threatened by the AI after learning the skill trees. The skill trees themselves are also not really interesting gameplay-wise, you just wait till you unlock a new perk, or get a bonus through random events. This is even made worse by the fact that Cassus Belli's cost a lot of prestige and piety mana now, and there are not enough ways to increase them except for unlocking perks in the skill trees or doing a decision every 5-10 years. My strategy in CK3 is 90% of the time 'wait until I unlock this, so I can do this' out of all the PDX games, CK3 feels the most like a waiting game. It also is way too easy, in all 6 of my playthroughs, it was shockingly easy to conquer huge chunks of the map without any anti-blob mechanics. I for example conquered all of France and Iberia with a single character, and I didn't even really use a strategy aside from waiting to unlock my next cassus belli. Even my campaign to restore Zoroastrian Persia was pretty easy, with almost no strategy involved.
The internal politics are also too easy to manage right now. On paper things sound great, you have now dread mechanics which allows different playstyles, the RNG element of plots and revolts is more restricted, and the player is stuck with partition succession for most of the game. In practice, this just doesn't work out. Plots are way too easy to pull off right now, eliminating the risk of executing them. Characters are way less likely to start a civil war, making it easy to go through the game without a single civil war and revolts are laughably easy to deal with because the element of surprise is gone and they have also been nerfed, making them almost never a threat.
I'm also disappointed that the biggest flaws of CK2 haven't been addressed in this game. Cultures still almost play no role in the game, no having them mixed with tech doesn't make them realistic or interesting... Warfare and peace deals in CK are the weakest out of all the PDX games, but instead of improving it they have downgraded it. There is no economic system, and also not a real sense of progression in building up your nation unlike in for ex. Imperator Rome or Stellaris.
The fact that there are still a lot of mechanics missing that were present in CK2 doesn't help. This is 100% understandable because CK3 in its first year can't compete with CK2 who had years of DLC, but it still feels like I'm playing a lesser version of something better making it hard to enjoy the game.
I am very happy for the fans and Paradox that CK3 is experiencing a lot of success. And I was very excited to see it nominated for several Game of the Year awards. It's a joy to see that Crusader Kings is now finally getting the attention it deserves from mainstream gamers. I'm just a little bit disappointed that I feel alienated from the community because for me Crusader Kings II was great for its mix between strategy and role-playing. Now however it feels like a story generator, and the strategy elements aren't the focus of the game anymore. Maybe future patches and expansions will change my view on CK3, but I don't think I will ever return to the game in its current state.
I have always been reluctant to post my thoughts on CK3, because PDX games are huge and it's difficult to immediately express your thoughts about it. I however like to say that I'm a bit disappointed with how CK3 turned out, and it went in a direction that doesn't really suit me. The only real improvement in CK3 in my opinion are the 3D portraits. These simply look amazing and it is impressive how a random character generator is able to spawn, realistic-looking characters that all look unique. They also significantly help the role-playing aspect of the game. Sadly I can't say the same for the map graphics and interface, which both look very bland.
Sadly I feel that there isn't a 'game' anymore around these RPG mechanics. People keep praising CK3 for the role-playing, but it always felt restricted in the form of random events. Frankly, I think random events should be a 'nice-to-have' and not the backbone of the game. Random events are extremely limited, they feel forced and they get old very quickly. I just don't get excited by reading the same thing 5 times. To be fair CK2 also suffered from this but there were still a lot of interesting strategic challenges to overcome, so the game remained interesting. The role-playing aspects gave context to your campaign, but they weren't the reason why I played a campaign. I don't feel like I am playing a game anymore about managing my kingdom where stories form dynamically. I feel now that I'm playing a game where a story is generated through random events.
You may be puzzled because the mechanics present in CK2 are still in CK3, but they have all been streamlined so much that there not very interesting anymore. Warfare has become incredibly easy once you understand the skill trees. Not only is the rally system a huge downgrade, but it is way too easy to overpower everyone in the game. If you understand you know that is now very easy to form alliances and abuse mercenaries due to stewardship and diplomacy skill trees. I never felt threatened by the AI after learning the skill trees. The skill trees themselves are also not really interesting gameplay-wise, you just wait till you unlock a new perk, or get a bonus through random events. This is even made worse by the fact that Cassus Belli's cost a lot of prestige and piety mana now, and there are not enough ways to increase them except for unlocking perks in the skill trees or doing a decision every 5-10 years. My strategy in CK3 is 90% of the time 'wait until I unlock this, so I can do this' out of all the PDX games, CK3 feels the most like a waiting game. It also is way too easy, in all 6 of my playthroughs, it was shockingly easy to conquer huge chunks of the map without any anti-blob mechanics. I for example conquered all of France and Iberia with a single character, and I didn't even really use a strategy aside from waiting to unlock my next cassus belli. Even my campaign to restore Zoroastrian Persia was pretty easy, with almost no strategy involved.
The internal politics are also too easy to manage right now. On paper things sound great, you have now dread mechanics which allows different playstyles, the RNG element of plots and revolts is more restricted, and the player is stuck with partition succession for most of the game. In practice, this just doesn't work out. Plots are way too easy to pull off right now, eliminating the risk of executing them. Characters are way less likely to start a civil war, making it easy to go through the game without a single civil war and revolts are laughably easy to deal with because the element of surprise is gone and they have also been nerfed, making them almost never a threat.
I'm also disappointed that the biggest flaws of CK2 haven't been addressed in this game. Cultures still almost play no role in the game, no having them mixed with tech doesn't make them realistic or interesting... Warfare and peace deals in CK are the weakest out of all the PDX games, but instead of improving it they have downgraded it. There is no economic system, and also not a real sense of progression in building up your nation unlike in for ex. Imperator Rome or Stellaris.
The fact that there are still a lot of mechanics missing that were present in CK2 doesn't help. This is 100% understandable because CK3 in its first year can't compete with CK2 who had years of DLC, but it still feels like I'm playing a lesser version of something better making it hard to enjoy the game.
I am very happy for the fans and Paradox that CK3 is experiencing a lot of success. And I was very excited to see it nominated for several Game of the Year awards. It's a joy to see that Crusader Kings is now finally getting the attention it deserves from mainstream gamers. I'm just a little bit disappointed that I feel alienated from the community because for me Crusader Kings II was great for its mix between strategy and role-playing. Now however it feels like a story generator, and the strategy elements aren't the focus of the game anymore. Maybe future patches and expansions will change my view on CK3, but I don't think I will ever return to the game in its current state.
- 111
- 37
- 12
- 6
- 2