After 2 weeks, 2.0 impact on players is low

[stratigo]

eh? How are these related?

Thor.

Now this could just be me reminiscing incorrectly, but the rise of viking media, to my recollection, happened largely after the success of thor and the avengers, breaking sort of the stranglehold that the greek based pantheon had on popular culture and popularizing the norse pantheon, and through them, the norse people.

 

[Spike05]

Again, fantasy is not, in fact, medieval history. Warhammer isn't even particularly modeled off of medieval history, it's early modern.

Rome is more compelling for most people than any concrete medieval society, though people are also feel a romantic connection to the ideals of chivalry (which is a very narrow period of medieval history). Rome has a far outsized influence over the public conscience than any medieval state, and the ancient period a far outsized influence on modern society than the medieval period.


Rome 2 wasn't a flop either. It was just a mess and so lost people pretty hard and fast. A bit like Imperator. But the first Rome literally made CA as a company.




However, the success of Lord of the Rings and subsequent fantasy media has dwarfed the historic epic hard in the past 2 decades. It's amusing because 30 to 50 years ago fantasy was relegated to low budget B movies, while the historic epic was big premier business. There's dozen of famous HUGE budget roman epics and other ancient epics. They outnumber anything about the middle ages in hollywood. But people realized fantasy was cool, and so fantasy has overtaken the historic epic in almost its entirety really. I can't remember the last historic epic that was an actual success at the box office, or was a true everyone watches juggernaut like a GoT (or the sopranos).

Vikings have also gotten their due, in large part due to the success of marvel in the box office verse the relative failure of DC.

But, ultimately, western culture remains fascinated with the idea of rome far FAR FAAAAAAAAAAAAR more than it has any attraction to the middle ages, much to my chagrin cause there's a lot lost in translation. The popular imaginings of Rome aren't particularly accurate.

Also, like, a lot of people who look to the middle ages do so cause of the crusades, and hoo boy, you do not want to hang out with those people. The deus vult crowd sucks.

While I don't disagree with you IN GENERAL, on gaming Rome never (in the last decade) had a chance against medieval times. And fantasy beat both by far (young nerds growed up I guess )

When you mishmash fantasy and medieval (like GOT or LOTR) you have COLOSSAL success, akin of the Roman successes of the '70-'90.

So, fascinated=/=playerbase
I would like to have a steamdb-like tool for old games, to compare the first rome-total war with concurrent medieval games and see how it fared really... sadly it's not possible

 

[Spike05]

eh? How are these related?

I though it was the viking series to actually rise their popularity

 

[stratigo]

While I don't disagree with you IN GENERAL, on gaming Rome never (in the last decade) had a chance against medieval times. And fantasy beat both by far (young nerds growed up I guess )

When you mishmash fantasy and medieval (like GOT or LOTR) you have COLOSSAL success, akin of the Roman successes of the '70-'90.

So, fascinated=/=playerbase
I would like to have a steamdb-like tool for old games, to compare the first rome-total war with concurrent medieval games and see how it fared really... sadly it's not possible

I mean.... iunno. It hurts the historian in me to considser GoT or even LotR medieval at all. They are modern tales told by modern people, though tolkien at least had a reverence for the ascetics he borrowed and a backstory that wouldn't be too off. But the LotR is simply put, an adventure story that interfaces with the medieval in a very minor way. And GoT the medieval is barely window dressing.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Thor.

Now this could just be me reminiscing incorrectly, but the rise of viking media, to my recollection, happened largely after the success of thor and the avengers, breaking sort of the stranglehold that the greek based pantheon had on popular culture and popularizing the norse pantheon, and through them, the norse people.

Thor wasn't received well at all. The Avengers was, sure, but certainly not Thor. And I would argue that Thor has precious little to do with Norse Mythology or "Vikings" either. Id say the success of the show Vikings has more to do with the collective interest in Norse culture nowadays (shame that show also turned to garbage)

 

[Vernichtere]

I defended Rome at luanch and liked it there also. It was just empty in many places. People always compare with other games from paradox, so the launch failed,

Right now the game starts to play his strength. IIts a hybrid:

1. Characters from CK
2. Pops from Stellaris and Victoria

The warfare is here far better. The mix for characters and pops is also on a good way. The game avoids micro, But you can do a lot of micros when you want or just look how your realm develops. I love to look how people migrate for example. I would love when they add actual consumption of trade goods like they do with migration. Pops consum trade goods, but the trade routes for this goods can go indirect when there is no war. More connections between charcters and provinces: holdings. So something happens all the time in the background without my mighty hand.. The connection between pops and army is for example such a indirect thing.

 

[stratigo]

Thor wasn't received well at all. The Avengers was, sure, but certainly not Thor. And I would argue that Thor has precious little to do with Norse Mythology or "Vikings" either. Id say the success of the show Vikings has more to do with the collective interest in Norse culture nowadays (shame that show also turned to garbage)

I mean, vikings has little to do with norse history, mythology, or the actual sagas either except as set dressing for the cast to be involved in every major event in norse history in like a 200 year span.

Thor was received well. It was the second thor movie that faltered.

I don't think the TV show captured the imagination the way a character from was and is one of the biggest franchises in film. Vikings is no GoT.

 

[UlrichVonBaden]

I've been loving Imperator since 2.0 update, and I imagine with each successive patch more players will come either come back to the fold - or new players will find it.

 

[Tomice]

I've been loving Imperator since 2.0 update, and I imagine with each successive patch more players will come either come back to the fold - or new players will find it.

Exactly my opinion!
I guess 2.0.3 will also bring a boost, from the teasers it's gonna add a lot of polish to 2.0

What's most important is the turnaround in public opinion - not only are the recent steam review very positive, but several gaming magazines and youtube channels praise the rebirth of the game. It won't boost the player numbers as quickly as a fresh release with months of hype buildup, but I'm definitively seeing a turnaround.

Finally, Arheo and his team seem to have an excellent feel for the wishes of the community.
The empire building / antiquity simulation focus is just right, further patches will continue to boost this.

 

[ArchaeoFish18]

But a single popular Netflix show about Rome(especially the republican era of course) would nudge the balance.

Not about Rome, but this looks intriguing:

New Alexander the Great Series to Be Filmed in Greece

An Alexander the Great series tracing the life of the Greek warrior, has been announced by the creators of "Vikings" to be filmed in Greece.

greekreporter.com

I kind of wish they chose the initial phases of the Diadochi wars, maybe 323 to Ipsus. It's obviously not as well known as the life of Alexander, but the level of Game-of-Thrones style intrigue and treachery is high, and until Ipsus, there was a least a conceivable shot that someone might win it all, so the stakes are appropriately grand.

I feel like the late Republican period is somewhat overdone (the series Rome did such a nice job with the first season, but the second was disappointingly rushed). On the other hand, it's astounding to me that there haven't been more films and series about the 2nd Punic War.

 

[stratigo]

Not about Rome, but this looks intriguing:

New Alexander the Great Series to Be Filmed in Greece

An Alexander the Great series tracing the life of the Greek warrior, has been announced by the creators of "Vikings" to be filmed in Greece.

greekreporter.com

I kind of wish they chose the initial phases of the Diadochi wars, maybe 323 to Ipsus. It's obviously not as well known as the life of Alexander, but the level of Game-of-Thrones style intrigue and treachery is high, and until Ipsus, there was a least a conceivable shot that someone might win it all, so the stakes are appropriately grand.

I feel like the late Republican period is somewhat overdone (the series Rome did such a nice job with the first season, but the second was disappointingly rushed). On the other hand, it's astounding to me that there haven't been more films and series about the 2nd Punic War.

Alexander has more, uh, common person cred that the diodachi sadly. I'd be more interested in them than watching what will likely be a cringey whitewashing of a fairly brutal mass murderer. Alexander was, even by period standards, a giant douche.

As for Rome, they knew they got cancelled in season 2, and so compressed what was planned to be 4 seasons on the rise of augustus to 1. And it did, indeed, suck to see it happen.

 

[maxk94]

This implies the inverse, that if the active number of players is relevant, then this thread is relevant... and let me tell you for an absolute fact... that just ain't true, buddy! This thread is irrelevant regardless of any other factor.

There are many talks in this thread, every little gain in knowledge is worth to open up this thread.

I can't see how that can be irrelevant.

 

[maxk94]

In the last 30 days. It's not that bad I think

41945 1.0 peak
7083 2.0 peak
= -83% decrease between day one players and the 2.0 peak

Okay that might be unfair, have a look to Stellaris release in comparison to the last big patch federation

68517 1.0 peak
64120 2.6 peak
= -6,5% decrease between day one players and the 2.6 peak

The problem is that even a 2.0 revamp didn't bring back more than 17% of day one players.

 

[TheMind]

41945 1.0 peak
7083 2.0 peak
= -83% decrease between day one players and the 2.0 peak

Okay that might be unfair, have a look to Stellaris release in comparison to the last big patch federation

68517 1.0 peak
64120 2.6 peak
= -6,5% decrease between day one players and the 2.6 peak

The problem is that even even a 2.0 revamp didn't bring back more than 17% of day one players.

It's normal. When you release something very scratchy and baddy, people start mistrusting you. I think the 1.0 peak won't be reached anymore, but at least we've got reasonable numbers at the moment.

 

[Decius]

To add something to the discussion^^

We don't know what the plans from paradox are when it comes to the future development of I:R and we don't know if there were internal goals for 2.0 (like sales for Heirs of Alexander, sales for the base game, player numbers, positive reviews, etc.). So it's not completely easy to say, how long we will receive further updates and DLCs. How long is paradox willing to support I:R resp. what are their internal conditions, which need to be met at a certain point, to consider I:R still worthwhile to support.

Joachim, one of the devs, mentioned in the last stream one important information - steam players aren't the whole player base. He mentioned that because he talked about the player number argument and success of I:R (maybe he meant this thred without calling it out^^).

While I understand the arguments here to some extent, I also understand the op to some extent -> therefore I'm a bit confused, why people are downplaying his argument. First, as long as it doesn't violate forum rules, I think everything related to the game should be allowed to be discussed. Second, I agree with the op that player numbers do have an impact on the further development of a game. It's not the only factor, but it's a indicator, how many people are interested in the game, how many potential buyers of future content are there. While steam player numbers from the steam charts page aren't everything, it's a good tool to compare it with other games, which get monitored by the same method. Are the conclusions made from such a comparison set in stone and determining for the games future? No! Is it nonsensical to do such conclusions and if somebody does that, he needs to be blamed? No!


To be honest, I don't know how this thread gathered so much anger, but I don't think it`s appropriate. I think a calm discussion about the topic is possible.

 

[Spike05]

To add something to the discussion^^

We don't know what the plans from paradox are when it comes to the future development of I:R and we don't know if there were internal goals for 2.0 (like sales for Heirs of Alexander, sales for the base game, player numbers, positive reviews, etc.). So it's not completely easy to say, how long we will receive further updates and DLCs. How long is paradox willing to support I:R resp. what are their internal conditions, which need to be met at a certain point, to consider I:R still worthwhile to support.

Joachim, one of the devs, mentioned in the last stream one important information - steam players aren't the whole player base. He mentioned that because he talked about the player number argument and success of I:R (maybe he meant this thred without calling it out^^).

While I understand the arguments here to some extent, I also understand the op to some extent -> therefore I'm a bit confused, why people are downplaying his argument. First, as long as it doesn't violate forum rules, I think everything related to the game should be allowed to be discussed. Second, I agree with the op that player numbers do have an impact on the further development of a game. It's not the only factor, but it's a indicator, how many people are interested in the game, how many potential buyers of future content are there. While steam player numbers from the steam charts page aren't everything, it's a good tool to compare it with other games, which get monitored by the same method. Are the conclusions made from such a comparison set in stone and determining for the games future? No! Is it nonsensical to do such conclusions and if somebody does that, he needs to be blamed? No!


To be honest, I don't know how this thread gathered so much anger, but I don't think it`s appropriate. I think a calm discussion about the topic is possible.

player numbers is a minor factor.
sales are the true only factor, and we don't have, nor can guess, this figure.

also, player numbers are dropping for the need of various fixing, some mandatory (levies bugs on both Linux and mac), others very pissing (holy site bug/feature clash)

those bugs are game breaking for some people, others finished their campaign but are waiting the hot fix to start a new one without incompatibility risks.

lots of people like me buy the game and all dlcs, but DON'T play all year long, I may focus on IR for two months, then move to play something else for a year, then return and buy all dlcs that came out during the pause.

that's make me PROFITABLE, but NOT PROFILABLE when it comes to player numbers

 

[Decius]

player numbers is a minor factor.
sales are the true only factor, and we don't have, nor can guess, this figure.

I wrote in my previous post, how I would consider player numbers as factor for sales and that actual sales are the important numbers.

also, player numbers are dropping for the need of various fixing, some mandatory (levies bugs on both Linux and mac), others very pissing (holy site bug/feature clash)

Agree, but I would just wait and see, how the long term effect is - I would love to see player numbers increasing long term after 2.02 and the next updates.

lots of people like me buy the game and all dlcs, but DON'T play all year long, I may focus on IR for two months, then move to play something else for a year, then return and buy all dlcs that came out during the pause.

that's make me PROFITABLE, but NOT PROFILABLE when it comes to player numbers

I'm one of those players too, but I guess the same is true for the other paradox games the op compared with I:R.

 

[pevergreen]

This has gone way too far off topic.