Right: Arrowhead developed, PI published. I hope you are not implying that Arrowhead can fix their broken-on-release-games while PI just can't tho...
Beta of 5.1 - 17th May 2011 - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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
Right: Arrowhead developed, PI published. I hope you are not implying that Arrowhead can fix their broken-on-release-games while PI just can't tho...
Well, the really confusing thing is that their tune changes, depending on the circumstances.
Johan and other Paradox people said similar things in HttT beta threads, which was surprising. But then I was even more surprised when people (including Paradox reps) recommended against using the (far less polished) DW betas if one wasn't fully prepared to be part of testing, and fully acknowledged that they were dealing with an unfinished product that was still very much being fixed and tweaked.
Now, I'm surprised, once again, if Paradox is implying DW is considered "done" or if the beta is now the recommended version. If the product somehow crossed a line without me realizing it, I'd kind of like to know that. I'd be disappointed, but it would still be useful information. And, frankly, I suspect they'd get more help from modders to fix things if they were a bit more up front about where things stood. Who wants to spend time fixing things if another beta is coming out next week. But two months? Six months? People may feel differently.
I have nothing to do with patching policy, but I can point out a few differences between Paradox and Arrowhead to consider:
Paradox: 30 employees on salary working on multiple projects. DW did not sell a few hundred thousand copies.
Arrowhead: a dozen people on low/no salary working on one project. Magicka did sell a few hundred thousand copies.
Well your sales are of course a reason to consider your support for your titles. But it isn't like the developer is the only one who has to consider its handling in such situations.
As a customer it seems more than doubtful if you preorder a game and set the game aside for several months, as I did with DW. There is something going wrong, when prices drop far quicker than you can expect a polished game. It just hurts, as it is obviously a waste of money and it causes quite some frustration if you expected a hot fix even before christmas ... and after weeks and weeks of constant hopeful visits, you recognize that a half year has passed meanwhile. Not to mention that many gamers meanwhile learned their lesson and hold back their purchases, till others confirm that the product reached a satisfying level. No patch, no sale.
There are plenty of good reasons for a full non-beta patch release from time to time, it isn't necessary that each one must change the world. And it is even more irritating if you have to describe the developer the reasons why beta patches can't be considered a real solution. If you even have to repeat that discussion ... oh well.
And I don't think that I'm trolling here
. Six months of patience, that is a milestone that justifies such an evaluation.
Last edited:
I feel something wrong here. Shouldn't quality of the game from Dev's side come first before customer royalty? It sounds as if "we are not making complete games because YOU are not buying enough of our broken games."
What's with the Paradox hate? Is it the new fad?
Oh no, you can't get achievements!
Oh no, you can't get achievements!
Do you really think we'd take the time to post asking (in a civil manner btw) for bugfixes, improvements etc... if we hated Paradox?
I mean it's obvious we all love them and we love their games!
That's certainly not what I said. I just pointed out to john_who that there are a few differences between the situation of Paradox and Arrowhead.
Oh yes, like that would be our problem. It seems that you only own Europa Universalis, so maybe you don't know about how the latest games of Paradox developed?
Hearts of Iron 3 was considered a mess, Semper Fi still didn't make it a title that is en par with the fun that HoI2 caused (that was may kind rating). Victoria 2 is neat, but it lacks diversity and challenge of other titles. Bugs are natural for both, so I don't even mention that part.
Besides several older games, where support ended with some old beta patches, Europa Universalis 3 was the prime title that justified to uphold the trust into Paradox.
I trusted them to do it right with DW, that is the reason why I preordered, while I got cautious with their other products. If they don't only fail to handle their flagship properly at release, but even so to polish it after 6 months, this is imho just a new dimension.
I don't know how others rate it, but it worries me when they announce new features as the horde and then they constantly rethink their concept over several betas. It leaves the impression that its more about trial & error, than about vision.
So yes, if they can't manage to improve even DW into something good within an acceptable time frame, I naturally have to be disappointed. And the logical result is that I have to question the outcome of their multiple projects approach, with what - 2 full games and 2 addons in process?
Just one single game in an awesome condition, really would do them a favor. One such game is reason enough for me, to spend money even for all their weaker titles and yet to remain a satisfied customer.
I completely agree with Golwar.
Their post release support is pushing me and other people i know to buy their games months later when they are cheaper and fixed. I really hope they understand how the way they released hoi3 or the long wait to get a first patch for DW is going to backlash on the long term.
Their post release support is pushing me and other people i know to buy their games months later when they are cheaper and fixed. I really hope they understand how the way they released hoi3 or the long wait to get a first patch for DW is going to backlash on the long term.
Paradox has always released buggy games and then fixed them through patches. HoI1 took several patches and some time to be at a good level, just as HoI2 did. Of course there is a certain amount of variability in some cases, with HoI3 being an absolute disaster when released, but Victoria 2 was fine, and DW's bugs are hardly game breaking. Personally, I'm more concerned about the lack of worthwhile features in DW.
That being said, I'm hoping that Paradox releases another EU expansion
I seriously do not see anything in EUIII at this point (5.1b) that would justify the negative reactions that I read here in this thread. There is certainly nothing game-breaking or overly frustrating in the current game. It is perfectly playable, enjoyable and addictive.
While it would be better if releases came out of the gate polished and bug-free, this is and has always been an illusion. Many or even most major titles are released in a broken state, and many remain broken. PI is virtually unique in long-term support for its titles. HoI3, V2 and EUIII are all perfectly solid games at this point thanks to that support.
I get the impression that the beta patch is held up because a few devs are still working on polishing the game, possibly in their own time. Have some consideration and be happy that they care. The patch is available here and is perfectly stable to play with. So use it and enjoy it. It will come when it comes.
While it would be better if releases came out of the gate polished and bug-free, this is and has always been an illusion. Many or even most major titles are released in a broken state, and many remain broken. PI is virtually unique in long-term support for its titles. HoI3, V2 and EUIII are all perfectly solid games at this point thanks to that support.
I get the impression that the beta patch is held up because a few devs are still working on polishing the game, possibly in their own time. Have some consideration and be happy that they care. The patch is available here and is perfectly stable to play with. So use it and enjoy it. It will come when it comes.
Last edited:
To be a true Paradox fan, you have to be a masochist. We love to live through the torture with the bugs and the long awaited next patch
The patch will come, they are a busy group. Remember, releasing a patch costs as much as a release of the game.
The patch will come, they are a busy group. Remember, releasing a patch costs as much as a release of the game.
What's really problematic is that because of the bug with EU3 Chronicles on Steam, I can't even get to the beta-patch forum to give it a try, and I keep banging up against all sorts of rather annoying bugs.
I wish a 'real' release was released, so I could at least get it through Steam to keep playing.
I wish a 'real' release was released, so I could at least get it through Steam to keep playing.
I too am in the situation of not being able to play the beta as a Mac user.
What worries me is what this length of delay is doing to Paradox's reputation and their sales. For example on another forum there was a discussion about paradox games where one person said - Add a year or so to the release date, and that's when the game is at its best. The reply by someone else - Actually my rule for Paradox games is wait until the game has a gold pack (aka 2.5 years after release) as the best time to play game.
This means that neither person is paying for the game at full price and in one case missing out on expansions. As someone who trusted Paradox I am now starting to wonder if this is the best approach and makes me fear for the future of the company as this is not a viable financial model for them.
Paradox do deserve better for their dedication and enthusiasm for their products but until Paradox becomes a little more professional with their patching policy I fear they will continue to lose customers prepared to pay on a game's release.
What worries me is what this length of delay is doing to Paradox's reputation and their sales. For example on another forum there was a discussion about paradox games where one person said - Add a year or so to the release date, and that's when the game is at its best. The reply by someone else - Actually my rule for Paradox games is wait until the game has a gold pack (aka 2.5 years after release) as the best time to play game.
This means that neither person is paying for the game at full price and in one case missing out on expansions. As someone who trusted Paradox I am now starting to wonder if this is the best approach and makes me fear for the future of the company as this is not a viable financial model for them.
Paradox do deserve better for their dedication and enthusiasm for their products but until Paradox becomes a little more professional with their patching policy I fear they will continue to lose customers prepared to pay on a game's release.
I hope all of you whinging about the patch being delayed realize that this is a very complex game to make. And there doesn't seem to be a huge staff, and they are always working on many different games simultaneously. Give them a break. Plus, your idea of what is "fixed" is not necessarily the same as mine, so while you may demand a patch, I am not. Really, there is not that much traffic coming through these fora complaining about the patch situation, so for most players I would bet that it is not a deal-breaker.
Also (I know this is entering troll territory) Paradox has always been (in my experience) very forthcoming about addressing community issues and complaints. Add in the fact that their games are just about the most mod-able available and really, I don't think there is reason to worry about losing customers. Just because of one patch. Or all of them. It really doesn't matter.
tl;dr
PI could sell out to Sega or EA and be substantially wealthier, we would get crappier games, pay more for them, and still have a buggy-at-release-with-no-patch-support situation.
wow... its almost been 2 months... vicky 2 has gotten 1 full patch and 1 in beta since (not complaining i actually like vicky 2 better). is this patch ever going to be completed?
- Status