3D portraits allow you to play as yourself better than 2D

[bigbagofcheetos]

It allows you to create yourself (and anyone you'd like to) and feel what he's going through better than just 2D pictures. I started playing paradox games with EU4, then played CK3 and lastly Victoria 3. From all of those, I always go back to CK3 just because I can feel being the leader with his high and lows. It's like the Kingdom has not just a face, but a living persona. I always dreamed of a EU4 mod in CK3 just to play as Castille on it's conquest of the Americas.

And I feel like I'm the leader, not just some country that happens to have a king. I can feel what is going on with him because if he's smiling constantly then things must have to bego good, if he's angry then it's because the neighboor kingdom is at the doorstep of his.

 

[Arizal]

Do you mean you can have a character that looks like you? If so, that's only possible with a ruler designer in CK3. Victoria 3 doesn't have that, and I hope Project Ceasar doesn't give a lot of ressources to such a tool. Not that it wouldn't be something nice to have at some point (for some), but it's definitely below Random New World, as a feature I would like to see.

 

[Lord Lambert]

You are not playing as the leader, nor as any character in specific. You are not the king in a monarchy nor the Doge in a republic. You are the spirit of the nation, and there is no 3D model that can cover that.

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

Do you mean you can have a character that looks like you? If so, that's only possible with a ruler designer in CK3. Victoria 3 doesn't have that, and I hope Project Ceasar doesn't give a lot of ressources to such a tool. Not that it wouldn't be something nice to have at some point (for some), but it's definitely below Random New World, as a feature I would like to see.

What I meant by listing the games I've played (EU4, CK3 and V3) is that from all of those I always go back to CK3 because it has the best feeling of the leader in 3D.

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

You are not playing as the leader, nor as any character in specific. You are not the king in a monarchy nor the Doge in a republic. You are the spirit of the nation, and there is no 3D model that can cover that.

And that's why I always go back to CK3. Because I can play as the leader of a Kingdom or Empire. Hell, I'm playing right now CK3 as myself being the king of Castille.

 

[lazprune]

Do you mean you can have a character that looks like you? If so, that's only possible with a ruler designer in CK3. Victoria 3 doesn't have that, and I hope Project Ceasar doesn't give a lot of ressources to such a tool. Not that it wouldn't be something nice to have at some point (for some), but it's definitely below Random New World, as a feature I would like to see.

I thought I was the only person in the universe to use Random New World. Wow.

 

[Lord Lambert]

And that's why I always go back to CK3. Because I can play as the leader of a Kingdom or Empire. Hell, I'm playing right now CK3 as myself being the king of Castille.

I'd argue you are not playing as a character there either. You are playing as the dynasty, as if your characters mind implants into your heir on death. You as a player can have a cohesive strategy for the game crossing over centuries and many generations which is obviously completely unrealistic and fictional.

 

[lazprune]

We are not sure if Project Caesar will have characters or not but if it does, I hope it is in 2D.

What I meant by listing the games I've played (EU4, CK3 and V3) is that from all of those I always go back to CK3 because it has the best feeling of the leader in 3D.

The CK2 portrait system was fine because 1) it wasn't 3D uncanny models and 2) you could still make yourself. I once made myself in the AGOT mod:

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

I'd argue you are not playing as a character there either. You are playing as the dynasty, as if your characters mind implants into your heir on death. You as a player can have a cohesive strategy for the game crossing over centuries and many generations which is obviously completely unrealistic and fictional.

Respectfully, I think you are trying to tell me what I should feel playing the game? CK3 allows me to do something I like and that's what I'm saying in this thread. No spirits, dynasties or mind implants, I don't even know how you got there. I play CK3 as a leader of a kingdom and I'm having fun doing it. Seeing how my character crushes the enemy or suffers when there is a stronger army approaching the castle with a 3D model is better than a 2D.

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

We are not sure if Project Caesar will have characters or not but if it does, I hope it is in 2D.



The CK2 portrait system was fine because 1) it wasn't 3D uncanny models and 2) you could still make yourself. I once made myself in the AGOT mod:
View attachment 1101727

You are telling me with 100% honesty that the portrait you are showing is better than what we have in CK3?

 

[Dwicarucymru]

You are telling me with 100% honesty that the portrait you are showing is better than what we have in CK3?

CK2 looks like one of those dress up games you'd play on your browser when it comes to portraits. CK3s are a lot better. I suppose Imperator's system would be alright for portraits do long as they actually let you change them.

 

[Davincie]

I don't want to play myself. I want to play a historical ruler (or country)

 

[lazprune]

You are telling me with 100% honesty that the portrait you are showing is better than what we have in CK3?

Yes.

 

[DukeLeto42]

It's important to understand that this may not be the game for you. And that's ok.

Despite medieval Europe being something I currently study, CK3 is not the game for me. Its focus on character drama rather than state-building just isn't what I play to experience. EU, I:R, Vic3 - these are all what draws my gaming fun. Leaving aside the actual looks of the portraits (some of us prefer a simpler, more stylized character portrait rather than an attempt at perfect representation that can be uncanny), we also don't want the ruler to be the sole focus of development and gameplay, which the 3D portrait turn tends to encourage.

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

Yes.

Ok.

 

[Galadredid]

I think 3D characters are somewhat likely, whether we want them or not. It's just the way that Paradox has become the last few games, not just CK3 but also Victoria and I;R even if the character model isn't much of a focus. But yeah, it shouldn't be because you want to customize the game as much as own possible.

That being said, I have wondered and still wonder if the game should move closer to at least an I;R and Victoria type of traits system, and a greater immersion with characters in monarchies especially. Royal marriages, inheritances etc are very important in how certain states did accumulate power - but that should be more like I;R rather than CK3 in general.

Also, a big challenge for any 3D portraits I haven't seen discussed much is historical fashion. The period covers an extremely broad sense of time, and you at least need one instance of clothes changing every century, sometimes even more frequently than that. And that's not without mentioning the differences in fashion across every single culture in the world, and whether to differentiate between royal clothing, advisor clothing, republican leader clothing, and religious leader clothing (for both male and female characters, too).

 

[Wagner Joy Division]

And I feel like I'm the leader, not just some country that happens to have a king

In EU, you are a country, not a leader

I can feel what is going on with him because if he's smiling constantly then things must have to bego good, if he's angry then it's because the neighboor kingdom is at the doorstep of his.

Been there. How about we avoid this valuable experience and spare 3d for hugely successful and popular projects like Victoria 3.
Let's keep EUV with backwards, outdated ancient 2d graphics and luddite unprogressive moving of toy soldiers.

 

[lazprune]

Ok.
View attachment 1101734View attachment 1101735View attachment 1101736

I made myself. If you want to play as an instagram model, you can.

 

[bigbagofcheetos]

I think 3D characters are somewhat likely, whether we want them or not. It's just the way that Paradox has become the last few games, not just CK3 but also Victoria and I;R even if the character model isn't much of a focus. But yeah, it shouldn't be because you want to customize the game as much as own possible.

That being said, I have wondered and still wonder if the game should move closer to at least an I;R and Victoria type of traits system, and a greater immersion with characters in monarchies especially. Royal marriages, inheritances etc are very important in how certain states did accumulate power - but that should be more like I;R rather than CK3 in general.

Also, a big challenge for any 3D portraits I haven't seen discussed much is historical fashion. The period covers an extremely broad sense of time, and you at least need one instance of clothes changing every century, sometimes even more frequently than that. And that's not without mentioning the differences in fashion across every single culture in the world, and whether to differentiate between royal clothing, advisor clothing, republican leader clothing, and religious leader clothing (for both male and female characters, too).

I agree with you. Maybe 3D is a task more challenging to accomplish than 2D. I'm sure it is. But the end product if done right is just more rewarding.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Respectfully, I think you are trying to tell me what I should feel playing the game?

I'm not doing that, no.

CK3 allows me to do something I like and that's what I'm saying in this thread. No spirits, dynasties or mind implants,

That's great. I'm glad you enjoy the game and I'm not trying to take that away from you.

I don't even know how you got there.

It's not uncommon for people to ask or theorise about who the player actually is in a paradox game.