Why is it that many people are angry right before the release of a new DLC?

  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

RichardOlcese

Colonel
46 Badges
Jun 20, 2019
963
1.976
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
I have noticed continuous criticism since at least Golden Century. Is it really deserved? Is it a tradition already? I myself was quite critical of some features implemented by Emperor DLC, particularly HRE and Catholicism changes. Is the EU4 public moanful? Do we like to complain too much?
 
  • 18
  • 13Haha
  • 9
  • 2Like
Reactions:
i just joined this subforum to keep on top of the coming update and...boy...EUIV players do seem to be a special breed...
 
  • 28
  • 14Haha
  • 14
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I have noticed continuous criticism since at least Golden Century.

Is it really deserved?
Yep.

Is it a tradition already?
Yep ... As much as Paradox releases DLC after DLC in order to grab cash.

Is the EU4 public moanful?
Yep, but more like the majority of the whole Paradox public that includes not just the EU-IV-players since the DLC-diarrhea is a thing in all Paradox-games, including the neglection of patch-stuff ( completions, fixes, optimisations and balancing ) in favour for said DLC-diarrhea.

Do we like to complain too much?
Nope. The "complaints" have a purpose. But sure, spread your ... opinion that it's satisfying to "complain" as if people do it just for the sake of it.
 
Last edited:
  • 62
  • 28
  • 8Like
Reactions:
For me it's because we keep getting new DLC's with new features when the AI has trouble as it is.

The AI can't manage the economy. It's constantly in debt even if it's a major that should be swimming in ducats. The AI also bugs out from time to time and just sits there when at war. You can fix it by reloading but still.

There are also things like the opinion modifier from the Council of Trent that make it impossible to ally to a Catholic nation as another Christian country.
 
  • 50
  • 11Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Recognize that anger is a motivation to post. Contentment is not. Also recognize that some posters have an imaginary perfect game in their minds and become frustrated when the Devs have a different vision. The one thing that baffles me is why some posters believe that accusing Paradox of being motivated by profit is a legitimate criticism. The game exists because people are able to earn a living as Devs, developing it. That means a constant flow of revenue to pay them, the landlord, the electric company and so on. Like any line of products, some DLCs have great features, some no so much. I avoided Golden Century for several years because of criticism here. Finally bought it for a Portugal run. Love the flavor that it brought to playing Portugal. Probably not worth the money if you play outside Europe or in HRE, but great if you want to play in Iberia. I personally like Emperor. But I don’t play MP, I don’t min-max and I’m not a map painter. So problems that others experienced didn’t show up in my games. To sum up, take the angry posts with a grain of salt.
 
  • 30
  • 19
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I would say the issue with GC was that it delivered something different than expected. People expected the whole DLC to focus on Iberia and maybe colonial management. Apart from missions, we received pirates and things like minority expulsion which is so bad that it was changed to rather not be used much by AI.

But I would say an even bigger issue was how Jake responded to such criticism.

I must say after that I lost my interest in EU4... I was excited again after Emperor, even bought GC on sale but put it down again rather quickly... I don't know, maybe I need a new EU with better mechanics... I might be in minority here but I do love Imperator POPs, it makes many things nicely dynamic which is more fun than "click to send part of your development abroad and convert the province in the process".

I will probably give it a try after Leviathan but won't buy DLC just yet since features don't look all that promising...
 
  • 21Like
  • 11
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
I think there is frustration there are glaring faults with the game that directly impacts the most popular nations in the game (Council of Trent as an example), and the worry is that they won't be fixed but instead we get new missions for an indigenous American tribe.

The other thing is, EU4 is a pretty immersive game (to Paradox's absolute credit) and a lot of the EU4 community care passionately about making it the best game possible. The game won't be better if we sit here going "Everything is amazing" although it's true maybe we should remember the reasons we love EU4 so much.
 
  • 33
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Its funny you picked golden century considering many people, me included, believe that is when EU4 started going downhill. The nadir was Emperor. Leviathan looks to be no better and perhaps may even be worse.

I stopped updating the game at 1.29.6 and do not intend to go any further.

Not interested in relearning pointless and banal new mechanics for the 99th time, many of which have no relation to any other mechanics. Take the Russian tributtons for example. The mana that fills up for those buttons is not affected by anything except for events. This pattern repeats throughout eu4. Mechanics in a vaccum for the sake of mechanics.

DLC $$$ goes BRRRRRRRRRrr while AI are in 10k debt in 1550 lmao.
 
  • 26
  • 5Like
  • 4
Reactions:
Recognize that anger is a motivation to post. Contentment is not. Also recognize that some posters have an imaginary perfect game in their minds and become frustrated when the Devs have a different vision. The one thing that baffles me is why some posters believe that accusing Paradox of being motivated by profit is a legitimate criticism. The game exists because people are able to earn a living as Devs, developing it. That means a constant flow of revenue to pay them, the landlord, the electric company and so on. Like any line of products, some DLCs have great features, some no so much. I avoided Golden Century for several years because of criticism here. Finally bought it for a Portugal run. Love the flavor that it brought to playing Portugal. Probably not worth the money if you play outside Europe or in HRE, but great if you want to play in Iberia. I personally like Emperor. But I don’t play MP, I don’t min-max and I’m not a map painter. So problems that others experienced didn’t show up in my games. To sum up, take the angry posts with a grain of salt.
Lmao using Portugal to justify Golden Century?
1.30 sorted out Portugal a bit not Golden Century.
Portugal had trade efficiency twice in its ideas...
The community feedback on Portugal was ignored and it continues to be a meme trading/colonization country, despite of historically being poor traders, since the india operation was being run by soldiers, and poor colonisers because they barely had the manpower...
 
  • 19
  • 6
  • 2Like
Reactions:
...The one thing that baffles me is why some posters believe that accusing Paradox of being motivated by profit is a legitimate criticism...

Agreed with this. Paradox isn't a charity.

Of course, the DLCs are a cash grab. Why wouldn't it be? Developers don't get paid to make content to make some people feel better. They get paid to produce content that makes the company money.

Paradox Interactive is a public company. Like all public companies, they are motivated by their shareholders to make returns for the money invested, and preferably lots of money at that. DLCs allows them to squeeze more money out of a game before they have to move on and develop a new one.

Shareholder's interest always comes first. Consumers are only relevant in so much that they matter to the shareholder. This is nothing new and literally how all publicly traded companies work.

Doing nothing but fixing and balancing the core game doesn't make them money. Producing new content that people buys is what matters.

As a CK2 dev once said, when asked about when they will stop making DLCs: "When people stop buying them".
 
  • 15
  • 12
  • 3Like
Reactions:
There are thousands of people playing the game daily.

There are the same 10 - 20 people that do most of the complaining on the forum.

Their opinions are of the vast minority, most people enjoy the game and get on and play it. Those that don't, come to forums to voice their dis-like which in turn makes the majority of forum content negative. It's the same in nearly every game forum ever.

Their negativity may be completely justified, but you'll always find that those with an issue will voice it and those that are content or actually happy rarely come on a forum to repeatedly mention it in every third thread, circle jerking each other into a content stupified state...
 
  • 37
  • 7
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Honestly the issue is quite simple. EU IV has a massive scope. Therefore most community members have their own ideas on what should be done next. PDX couldn't release any DLC without a significant amount of people criticsing ehat they priorise.

Adding to that is the legitimate issue that PDX at the moment barely fixes the most glaring bugs and issues before starting on the next expansion. While we are suppposed to get a big amount of bugfixes with 1.31 many people hardly differentiate between patch and dlc and think that the issues from last DLC are just ignored. (Which frankly they are if you look at the bandaid fixes in the code for 1.30 issues)
 
  • 8Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I had my share of criticism about Golden Century, and I still think it was a bad DLC. But I was positive about Emperor and the newcomming Leviathan. I like the ideas dispite the fact that some did not play out that wel as intended (merc's). But the ideas where in the right place. I also doin't understand the criticism to Leviathan, but hey, thats just me.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Agreed with this. Paradox isn't a charity.

Of course, the DLCs are a cash grab. Why wouldn't it be? Developers don't get paid to make content to make some people feel better. They get paid to produce content that makes the company money.

Paradox Interactive is a public company. Like all public companies, they are motivated by their shareholders to make returns for the money invested, and preferably lots of money at that. DLCs allows them to squeeze more money out of a game before they have to move on and develop a new one.

Shareholder's interest always comes first. Consumers are only relevant in so much that they matter to the shareholder. This is nothing new and literally how all publicly traded companies work.

Doing nothing but fixing and balancing the core game doesn't make them money. Producing new content that people buys is what matters.

As a CK2 dev once said, when asked about when they will stop making DLCs: "When people stop buying them".

I agree, but stuff like bugs don't directly increase revenue, they indirectly do. Look at cyberpunk or Warcraft 3 reforged.
 
  • 5
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I had my share of criticism about Golden Century, and I still think it was a bad DLC. But I was positive about Emperor and the newcomming Leviathan. I like the ideas dispite the fact that some did not play out that wel as intended (merc's). But the ideas where in the right place. I also doin't understand the criticism to Leviathan, but hey, thats just me.
I think the major problem is that the focus is on content and small mechanical changes. We want more peace time mechanics and a good tall play, and when an expectancy of it is created and the reality is disappointing, people are angry.


For example, Leviathan was said to have tall mechanics, we get 3-4 buttons to press every X amount of years.
 
  • 12
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I would say the issue with GC was that it delivered something different than expected. People expected the whole DLC to focus on Iberia and maybe colonial management. Apart from missions, we received pirates and things like minority expulsion which is so bad that it was changed to rather not be used much by AI.

But I would say an even bigger issue was how Jake responded to such criticism.

People need to remember that Johan had to step in to the Emperor project mid update after Jake "left" the company. I would guess they had a lot to fix and little time to do it before the release date. Not an excuse but that is likely why some features are problematic.

I am interested to see the upcoming patch info since Leviathan is completely under Johan's control. Hopefully a lot of old issues Jake refused to address will be fixed, as much as the engine will allow.
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
To respond to the title: I think it's because that's when there's been the largest amount of time since the previous update.

To illustrate: After Emperor dropped, some people were asking "Is it intentional that the 'Heretic' opinion modifer from the Council of Trent applies to Heathens? Or that the stances nations take have almost no effect on the decisions made in the council? Why do subjects hate their overlod for being a hegemony."

The longer the lack of feedback from the devs about that, the more frustrated the players feel. Almost a year later, people are at their most annoyed. Then, hopefully, the issues get resolved in the patch, to be replaced with new ones, and the cycle repeats.
 
  • 12Like
  • 3
Reactions:
There are thousands of people playing the game daily.

There are the same 10 - 20 people that do most of the complaining on the forum.

Their opinions are of the vast minority, most people enjoy the game and get on and play it. Those that don't, come to forums to voice their dis-like which in turn makes the majority of forum content negative. It's the same in nearly every game forum ever.

Their negativity may be completely justified, but you'll always find that those with an issue will voice it and those that are content or actually happy rarely come on a forum to repeatedly mention it in every third thread, circle jerking each other into a content stupified state...




1617881301127.png
1617881161509.png
1617881178651.png


For comparison:


1617881223676.png
1617881231953.png


You are right that on paper people who are dissatisfied with the game are the ones who are more likely to speak out; but to say that only the minority is dissatisfied with where the game is going is a hard sell. For YEARS those forums were known for being filled with people who were.. seemingly unnaturally appreciative of the game; this has been slowly changing since only last 1-2 years and to claim that it's a "standard" and that they are "a minority" is frankly disrespectful and untrue.


And to be clear: I have no position in this myself, most of the things that people both appreciate and dislike about EU4 don't exactly affect me so I have no stakes in this debacle on whether or not the last few updates were good or bad. At the same time though I'm not a big fan of undervaluing someone's opinion on false grounds that "they are a minority"
 

Attachments

  • 1617881118345.png
    1617881118345.png
    85,8 KB · Views: 0
  • 1617881139475.png
    1617881139475.png
    59,9 KB · Views: 0
  • 1617881146756.png
    1617881146756.png
    243,7 KB · Views: 0
  • 30
  • 5
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel like a number of latest DLC have felt more harmful than beneficial to the game. There is also of course the influence of the pandemic, which I find makes people more grumpy overall. And there is also a feel that the game gets updated way to rarely, with important patches getting more and more spaced out.
 
  • 6Like
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.